BX  7327    .Al  1891 
Garrison,  J.  H.  18A2-1931, 
The  old  faith  restated 


I 


Digitized  by  the  Internet  Archive 
in  2014 


https://archive.org/details/oldfaithrestatedOOgarr 


The  Old  Faith  Restated 


BEING  A  RESTATEMENT,  BY  REPRESENTATIVE 
MEN,  OF  THE 


FUNDAMENTAL  TRUTHS  AND  ESSENTIAL  DOCTRINES 
OF  CHRISTIANITY 


AS  HELD  AND  ADVOCATED  BY 


THE  DISCIPLES  OF  CHRIST 

IN  THE  LIGHT  OF  EXPERIENCE  AND  OF  BIBLICAL  RESEARCH. 


^     EDITED  BY 


J.  H.  GARRISON,  A.  M., 

Author  of  "Heavenward  Way,"  "Alone  With  God,"  etc., 
and  Editor  of  The  Christian-Evangelist. 


ST.  LOUIS: 
CHRISTIAN  PUBLISHING  COMPAIfY. 


Copyrighted,  1891, 

BY 

Chkistian  Publishing  Cosipany. 


PREFACE. 


On  a  chill  autumn  evening  in  1889,  the  editor  of  this  Volume  sat  alone  n 
front  of  a  cheerful  grate,  at  his  home,  pondering  over  the  state  of  current 
religious  thought  and  the  condition  and  needs  of  the  religious  movement 
with  which  his  life  and  labors  have  been  identified.  His  meditation  at 
length  took  the  form  of  an  anxious  inquiry  as  to  what  he  could  do  to 
promote  the  welfare  of  the  Current  Eeformation  and  to  assist  in  guiding  it 
safely  through  the  perils  which  beset  it  from  within  and  without.  After 
much  serious  thought  over  this  problem,  and  after  availing  himself  of  the 
promise,  "  If  any  of  you  lack  wisdom  let  him  ask  of  God,  who  giveth  to  all 
men  liberally  and  upbraideth  not,  and  it  shall  be  given  him,"  he  took  up  liis 
pen  and  at  once  outlined  the  work  substantially  as  it  is  herein  presented. 

In  such  a  mood  of  soul,  superinduced  by  such  conditions,  this  work,  in 
its  purpose,  plan  and  scope,  was  conceived.  The  eminent  men  to  whom  was 
committed  the  several  parts,  all  accepted  the  work  assigned  them,  and,  in 
God's  good  providence,  were  all  spared  to  complete  the  same.  The  series 
of  articles  thus  planned  ran  through  the  entire  volume  of  the  Christian- 
Evangelist  for  the  year  1890,  awakening  deep  interest  and  exciting  general 
comment.  They  have  since  been  carefully  re\ised  by  their  respective 
authors,  and  are  now  presented  to  the  public  in  the  present  form,  as 
originally  contemplated. 

The  underlying  thought  of  the  book,  as  its  title  indicates,  was  to  present 
a  fresh  and  independent  re-statement  of  the  great  truths  and  principles  of 
Christianity  as  they  are  apprehended,  held  and  advocated  by  representative 
men  of  the  Current  Keformation  to-day.  It  is  believed  that  now,  after  the 
lapse  of  three-quarters  of  a  century  since  the  inauguration  of  this  movement 
for  the  restoration  of  New  Testament  Christianity  and  the  unity  of 
Christians,  when  the  bitterness  engendered  by  the  intellectual  conflicts 
incident  to  our  earlier  history  has  been  removed  or  greatly  assuaged,  and 
when  there  has  been  time  to  test  the  value  of  the  doctrine,  and  to  learn 
much  in  the  school  of  actual  experience,  it  is  possible  to  present  a  calm  and 
dispassionate  statement  of  the  whole  ground  of  our  movement,  wliich  will 
more  fully  and  fairly  represent  tlie  genius  and  spirit  of  our  plea  than  any 
presentation  made  at  an  earlier  date  in  our  history. 

(3) 


4 


PREFACE. 


Furthermore,  it  was  felt  that  such  a  restatement  wonld  be  peculiarly 
timely,  just  now,  when  discussion  of  the  fundamental  points  of  Cliristian 
doctrine  is  rife  in  the  religious  world,  and  when  thoughtful  people,  wearied 
with  the  uncertain  and  unprofitable  speculations  of  the  various  conflicting 
creeds,  are  asking,  as  never  before,  for  the  vital,  the  essential  and  the 
permanent  in  Christianity.  Such  a  state  of  wide-spread  religious  unrest,  is, 
in  itself,  an  instructive  commentary  on  the  futility  of  all  human  formulations 
of  doctrine,  designed  as  bases  of  Christian  fellowship,  and  affords  a  striking 
proof  of  the  wisdom  and  absolute  need  of  a  movement  whose  aim  is  the 
restoration  of  the  original  and  only  inspired  Confession  of  Faith — a 
confession  on  which  the  church  originally  stood,  united,  tree  and  victorious. 
The  very  best  minds  in  all  the  religious  bodies  to-day  are  looking  away  from 
the  doctrinal  speculations  which  constitute  so  large  a  part  of  modern  creeds, 
toward  a  simpler  statement  of  faith,  as  offering  the  only  remedy  for  a 
divided  church.  Many  would  go  back  to  the  Xicene  creed,  others  to  the 
Apostles'  creed,  so  called,  wliile  not  a  few  discerning  spirits  are  beginning  to 
see,  what  Alexander  Campbell  and  his  co-laborers  saw  three  quarters  of  a 
century  ago,  that  the  only  practicable  basis  for  a  united  church  is  the 
heavenly-revealed  creed  of  Simon  Peter — "  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
the  liAing  God."  At  such  a  time,  and  in  such  a  state  of  religious  thought, 
we  would  be  recreant  to  a  very  sacred  trust,  not  to  use  every  opportunity 
for  bringing  the  principles  we  hold  to  be  so  vital,  in  contact  with  the 
awakened  public  mind.  Beyond  question,  the  discussions  in  this  volume 
have  a  most  important  bearing  on  the  great  theological  issues  of  our  day. 

An  additional  fact  which  emphasizes  the  need  of  such  a  restatement  as  is 
herein  published,  is  that  a  generation  of  younger  disciples  has  come  upon 
the  stage  since  the  fathers  fell  asleep,  and  since  the  issues  which  they  made 
with  the  religious  world  have  ceased  to  be  common  themes  of  pulpit  discus- 
sion. There  is  reason  to  fear  that  many  of  these  are  not  familiar  with,  nor 
well  grounded  in,  the  great  distinguishing  principles,  which,  in  so  short  a 
period  of  time,  have  wrought  such  marvelous  results.  They  will  be  more 
likely  to  study  these  principles  and  aims,  presented  as  a  whole,  in  a  fresh 
modern  statement  by  living  men,  than  in  the  earlier  fragmentary  literature 
among  us.  If  the  time  shall  ever  come  when  the  bulk  of  our  membership 
shall  fail  to  have  an  intelligent  grasp  of  the  meaning,  aim  and  value  of  our 
mission,  as  advocates  of  pure.  New  Testament  Christianity,  and  shall 
become  indifferent  to  those  truths  which  it  has  been  given  us  to  defend,  our 
work  as  reformers  will  have  ended,  and  God  will  carry  out  his  purposes 
through  other  agencies. 

The  subjects  treated,  herein,  will  be  found  to  embrace  the  faith,  doctrine, 
ordinances,  organization,  work,  worship  and  growth  of  the  Church  of 


PREFACE. 


5 


Christ,  as  held  and  advocated  by  representative  men  in  the  Reformation, 
together  with  a  statement  of  its  relation  to  other  reformations  in  the 
Church.  A  closing  chapter  gathers  up  some  of  the  lessons  which  our  past 
experience  has  taught  us,  and  draws  some  conclusions  as  to  our  present  duty 
and  responsibility.  The  essential  agreement  of  all  these  writers  in  all 
matters  of  fundamental  importance  demonstrates  the  practicability  of  main- 
taining unity  of  faith  and  doctrine  without  any  other  authoritative  creed 
than  that  presented  in  the  New  Testament.  In  treating  the  various  subjects 
assigned  them,  these  writers  were  placed  under  no  restrictions  as  to 
conformity  with  any  former  writings  or  statements  among  us,  but  had 
perfect  liberty  to  investigate  for  themselves  and  to  publish  the  results  of 
their  latest  and  best  thought,  in  the  light  of  ail  the  pi'ogress  which  has  been 
made  along  the  lines  of  Biblical  research.  And  yet,  with  all  this  freedom,  it 
will  be  found  that  their  teaching  is  marked  by  a  degree  of  unity  and  consis- 
tency that  it  would  be  difficult  to  equal  and  impossible  to  surpass,  in  any 
creed-bound  body  of  Christendom.  This  fact,  at  the  present  time,  is  of 
great  importance,  and  its  significance  will  not  escape  the  attention  of 
tlioughtful  minds  in  all  religious  bodies. 

The  editor  congratulates  himself  on  being  able  to  present,  under  one 
cover,  the  maturest  thought  of  so  many  of  our  ablest  minds  on  the 
profoundest  themes  of  the  gospel,  and  feels  that  he  is  not  prompted  by 
mere  partisan  pride  in  saying  that  the  group  of  writers,  whose  productions 
are  lierein  offered  to  the  reading  public,  is,  with  the  single  exception  which 
modesty  compels  him  to  make,  one  of  which  any  religious  body  in  Cluisten- 
dom  might  well  be  proud.  They  are  men  who  have  been  trained  to  think 
for  themselves  and  who  do  not  accept  their  theology  at  second  hand. 

Believing  the  great  mass  of  readers  would  be  glad  to  look  upon  the 
features  of  men  so  widely  known,  we  have  prevailed  upon  most  of  them  to 
permit  us  to  present  a  photo-engra\ing  of  them  in  connection  with  their 
articles.  A  very  condensed  biograpliical  sketch  of  each  writer  will  be  found 
in  connection  with  his  picture. 

This  book  was  conceived,  and  is  now  published,  in  the  conviction  that 
the  religious  movement  wliose  aims  and  principles  are  herein  set  forth,  has 
not  yet  completed  its  providential  mission  in  the  world,  but  that,  wisely 
guided  so  as  to  avoid  the  dangers  which  have  wrecked  or  limited  the 
usefulness  of  other  reformations,  it  is  destined  yet  to  be  used  of  God  in  the 
consummation  of  his  glorious  purposes — the  imity  of  his  Church  and  the 
conversion  of  the  world.  That  this  volume  may  contribute,  in  some  humble 
measure,  to  such  a  destiny  is  the  sincere  prayer  of 

The  Editor. 

Rose  Hill,  St.  Louis,  July  4,  1891. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

I.  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE  AS  THE 
WORD  OF  GOD,  AND  THE  ONLY  RULE  OF  FAITH  AND 
PRACTICE.    Prof.  J.  W.  McGaevey   11 

1.  The  Narrowest  Ground  of  Belief           ....  12 

2.  Broader  Grounds  of  Belief    ......  15 

3.  The  Broadest  Grounds  of  Belief           ....  23 

4.  ■  The  Grounds  on  which  we  Receive  the  Bible  as  the  Only  Rule 

of  Faith  and  Practice           .....  44 

II.  GROUNDS  Ox.  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS  AS  THE  MESSIAH, 
THE  SON  OF  GOD  AND  SAVIOR  OF  THE  WORLD.     G.  W. 

LONGAN  ......... 

1.  Jesus'  Conception  of  God  ..... 

2.  Jesus  as  Mediator  ....... 

3.  Did  Jesus  Create  a  New  Religion?  .... 

4.  Jesus  the  Creator  of  a  New  Religion  .... 

III.  THE  GROUND  OF   MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION,— or,  SIN 
AND  ITS  REMEDY.    J.  S.  Lamar  

1.  The  Entrance  of  Sin  into  the  World  .... 

2.  The  Banishment  of  Sin  from  the  World  .... 

3.  Actual  Sins  ....... 

4.  The  Remedy  ........ 

IV.  THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION,  or,  THE  THREE  DISPEN- 
SATIONS,—THEIR  LIMITS  AND  THEIR  CHARACTERISTICS. 


J.  J.  Haley  ........  120 

1.  Revelation  Progressive         ......  120 

2.  Unity  of  the  Dispensations        .....  130 

3.  Dispensational  Distinctions  .....  135 

4.  Results  of  Ignoring  a  Change  of  Dispensations  .         .  143 

(7) 


49 
55 
61 
82 
89 


98 
98 
104 
109 
114 


8 


CONTENTS. 


V.    THE  DOCTRINE  OF  JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH.    Prof.  I.  B. 


Gkubbs  149 

1.  Fundamental  Idea  in  Justification           ....  149 

2.  Bearings  of  Legal  Justification            ....  150 

3.  The  Method  of  Faith   152 

4.  Bearings  of  this  Jlethod  ......  153 

5.  The  Two  Methods  in  Contrast        .....  155 

6.  Paul  and  James     .......  162 

VI.  REPENTANCE— ITS  NATURE,  CONDITIONS  AND  NECESSITY. 

H.  W.  Everest,  A.  M.,  LL.  D.    .         .         .         .         .         .  igg 

1.  The  Nature  of  Repentance    .         .         .         .         .  .169 

2.  Conditions  and  Consequences  of  Repentance            .         ,  176 

3.  Necessity  of  Repentance      ......  184 

VII.  BAPTISM,  — ITS  ACTION,   SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.    J.  B. 
Beiney             .........  192 

1.  Its  Action             .......  192 

2.  Lexical  Authority      .......  199 

3.  Circumstantial  Evidence            .....  203 

4.  Evidence  from  Histoiy        ......  205 

5.  Its  Subjects          .......  209 

6.  Its  Import      ........  2i8 

VIII.  THE  LORD'S  SUPPER.    D.  R.  Dungan    ....  231 

1.  The  Elements  Used  in  the  Supper            ....  233 

2.  The  Cup,  or  Fruit  of  the  Vine     .....  234 

3.  For  Whom  was  the  Supper  Intended?      ....  241 

4.  When  Should  the  Church  Break  Bread?         .         .         .  245 

5.  But  What  Time  of  the  Day  Should  we  Break  Bread?      .         .  248 

6.  The  Posture  in  which  it  Should  be  Received             .         .  249 

7.  What  Name  Should  be  Given  to  the  Ordinance?            .         .  250 

8.  What  of  Transubstantiation  and  Consubstantiation?             .  250 

9.  The  Purpose  of  the  Emblematic  Loaf  and  Cup      .         .         .  252 

IX.  CONVERSION,— WHAT  IS  IT  AND  HOW  PRODUCED?    A.  I. 
HoBBS    ..........  254 

1.  Change  of  Opinions         ......  255 

2.  Outer  Moral  Habits    .......  256 

3.  Benevolence — Good  Will  to  Men         ....  256 

4.  Getting  Religion        .......  257 

5.  Regeneration        .......  258 

6.  Passivity  in  Conversion        .         .                   ...  262 


CONTENTS. 


9 


7.  Begotten   266 

8.  Born  Aarain     .......         .  267 

9.  Dead,  Quickened,  Raised  .....  268 

10.  New  Creation  .......  270 

11.  Adoption,  Naturalization,  Translation  .  ,  •  272 

12.  How  is  Conversion  Produced?        .....  272 

13.  Tradition    ........  274 

X.  THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  W.  K. 
Pendleton,  LL.  D.  .......  275 

1.  Prophetic  Promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit         ....  278 

2.  John  Announces  It  .....  .  27S 

3.  Christ  Refers  to  It   270 

4.  Emphasized  at  Close  of  Christ's  Ministry        .         .         .  280 

5.  Repeated  After  his  Resurrection     .....  281 

6.  Manifested  at  Pentecost  .....  283 

7.  Continuous  Manifestations  in  Acts  ....  285 

8.  Mission  of  the  Holy  Spirit         .....  292 

XI.  REFORMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH,— SOME  OF  ITS  RESULTS. 
Prof.  J.  M.  Trible  .......  294 

1.  The  Right  of  Reformation     .         .         .         .         .  .296 

2.  The  Rule  of  Reformation  .....  297 

3.  The  Reason  of  Reformation  .....  300 

4.  The  Reformation  of  the  Campbells  and  their  Compeers        .  303 

5.  •  The  Next  Reformation   308 

XII.  THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH,— HOW  BROKEN,  AND  THE 
CREED-BASIS  ON  WHICH  IT  MUST  BE  RESTORED.  Ceorge 
Plattenbueg         ........  310 

1.  Denominationalism  and  Its  Creeds  ....  311 

2.  The  Work  Proposed         ......  319 

3.  On  What  Ground   321 

4.  Protestantism  and  its  Creeds      .....  322 

5.  Tlie  Lambeth  Conference     ......  3.34 

6.  The  True  Ground  ......  336 

7.  Jesus  is  the  Christ     .......  340 

8.  Conclusion  .......  348 

XIII.  ORGANIZATION.    B.  B.  Tyler,  D.  D.  .         .         .         .  351 

XIV.  THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD.    A.  McLean,  LL.D.  365 

1.  The  Eternal  Purpose  .         .         .         .         .  .365 

2.  What  Has  Been  Accomplished  ....  369 

3.  The  Mission  of  the  Church  .         .         .         .  .382 


10 


CONTENTS. 


XV.  MEANS  OF  SPIRITUAL  GROWTH.    F.  D.  Power        ,         .  390 

XVI.  CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE.    B.  W.  Johnson      .         .  398 

1.  The  Hope  of  the  Ancient  "World  ....  398 

2.  Life  and  Immortality  Brought  to  Light      ....  402 

3.  The  Basis  of  Our  Hope     ......  406 

4.  The  Hope  of  the  Saints         .         .         .         .         .  .411 

5.  Heaven      ........  415 

XVII.  LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE,  or,  HELPS  AND 
HINDRANCES.    J.  H.  Garrison   421 

1.  Preliminary          .......  421 

2.  New  Wine  in  Old  Bottles      .         .         .         .         .  .425 

3.  Perils  of  a  Separate  Existence    .....  428 

4.  An  Abused  Motto ;  or,  Loyalty  and  Liberty         .          .  .  432 

5.  A  Right  Principle  Wrongly  Applied      ....  435 

6.  Doctrinal  Extremes    .......  439 

7.  Extreme  Church  Independency           ....  446 

8.  The  Controversial  Spirit      .         .         .         .         .  .449 


9.    What  this  Reformation  has  Contributed  to  Religious  Thought  452 


John  W.  McGarvey  was  born  in  Hopkinsville,  Ky.,  March  1,  1829.  His 
father  was  a  native  of  Ireland,  and  did  not  move  to  this  country  until  he  was 
grown,  lie  located  in  Hopkinsville,  Ky.,  where  he  was  married  to  a  Miss 
Thompson,  who  was  born  and  reared  near  Georgetown,  Ky.  When  J.  W. 
McGarvey  was  four  years  old,  his  father  died,  and  his  niotlier  afterwards  married 
Dr.  G.  F.  Saltonstall.  In  1839  tlie  family  removed  to  TreuKjnt,  Ta/.t-wrll  ciiinty, 
111.,  where  our  fnlure  teacher,  preacher  and  author  ^^■as  trained  to  habits  of  iiKkis- 
try,  and  thorounhly  instructed  in  the  priiiiaiy  and  academic  branches  by  Mr. 
James  K.  Kelloirir,  a  successful  educator  of  the  jilace. 

In  April,  1847,  in  his  eightocut  h  ycai-,  he  entered  Bethany  Colleoje,  and  grad- 
uated with  honors  in  the  year  1850,  dclivcrini;  the  Greek  sjifccli.  While  at 
Bethany  he  confessed  faith  in  Christ,  and  w  as  bapti/cd  by  I'rof.  W .  K.  Pendleton. 
Innnediately  upon  his  conversi<)n,  his  mind  turneil  towaid  the  ministry,  and  it 
was  not  lung  before  he  gave  good  evidence  of  titness  for  the  work.  In  the  mean- 
time his  family  had  removed  to  Fayette,  Mo.,  at  which  place,  soon  after  leaving 
college,  he  taught  a  male  school  for  ten  months.  His  step-fatlier  died  of  cholera 
in  June,  ISol,  w  hile  on  his  way  to  attend  Commencement  at  Bethany  College, 
of  which  he  was  a  warm  friend,  leaving  it  a  child's  part  in  his  estate,  besides 
having  given  §2,")00  while  he  was  living. 

At  the  call  of  the  chui  ch  in  Fayette,  Bro.  McGarvey  gave  up  the  school  there, 
and  in  September,  1851,  was  ordained  to  the  work  of  the  ministry,  and  cuntinued 
his  labors  for  the  church  there  and  in  neighboring  county  churciies  until  Fel:)- 
ruary,  185.3,  when  he  removed  to  Dover,  LaFavette  county.  In  March,  1853,  he 
was  married  to  Ottie  F.  Hix,  of  Fayette.  He  resided  at  Dover  nine  years, 
dividing  his  time  with  the  hi.ime  chun-h  and  preaching  extensively  over  the  8tate 
of  ]\Iissouri.  He  also  held  live  religious  discussions  with  represt'utali ves  of 
various  religious  parties  during  this  pei  iod,  and  collected  money  to  erect  a  board- 
ing school  in  his  village,  which  lie  conducted  two  years. 

In  the  spring  of  18()2  he  accepted  the  pastoral  care  of  the  chui-ch  in  Lexing- 
ton, Ky.,  where  a  laige  field  of  usefulness  was  open  to  him.  During  the  same 
year  he  published  his  "Commentary  on  Acts,"  which  had  been  in  course  of 
preparation  for  more  than  three  years — a  work  which  yet  ImMs  its  place  in  our 
litei-ature  as  a  work  of  superior  merit.  On  the  removal  of  Kentn.  ky  University  to 
Lexington  in  18()5,  he  accei)ted  a  chair  in  the  Collcije  of  the  Bible,  but  still 
maintained  his  labors  for  the  Church,  which  had  greatly  prospered  umler  his 
care.  In  1866,  he  resigned  his  place  in  the  Church  to  give  his  whole  time  to  the 
work  in  the  L'niversit\-,  but  continued  to  share  its  pulpit  for  a  time  with  President 
Graham,  until  L.  B.  Wilkes  was  chwsi^n  as  bis  successor.  He  then  preached  three 
years  for  country  churches  in  cimnei  ti.in  with  his  other  lab(U's.  When  in  18()i)  the 
growth  of  the  Lexingt(jn  Church  reijuired  the  organization  of  a  second  one,  he 
was  called  to  serve  that  congregation,  which  he  did  for  eleven  years.  During 
that  time  the  Church  iiu-reased  its  membership  from  126  to  "4(X).  He  tlien 
resigned  his  work  in  the  city,  on  account  of  his  college  duties,  and  resumed  coun- 
try preaching. 

In  order  to  better  qualify  himself  for  his  college  work,  the  teachinu'  of  sacred 
history,  he  matle  a  tour  of  Pale>iin<-  in  IsTft,  and  in  b^sl  jinblisleMl  tlu;  result  of 
his  observations  in  "  Lands  of  the  Bilile,"  a  work  whieh  for  its  pains-taking  accn- 
racy,  and  clearness  of  description,  has  received  high  commendation  from  P.iblical 
scholars.  In  1886  he  published  Volume  I.  of  a  work  on  Christian  Evidence, 
entitled  "Text  and  Canon;"  and  this  was  followed  in  18<)1  by  Volume  IL, 
"  Credibility  and  Inspiration  of  the  Bible."  These  works  bear  the  marks  of  con- 
scientious and  careful  investigation,  and  received  favorable  notice  from  various 
sources. 

Bro.  McGarvey  is  too  well  known,  even  if  it  were  within  the  jun-pose  of  these 
sketches,  to  require  "any  analysis  of  his  jiowers."  lie  r<  still  cnnnecled  with  the 
College  of  the  Bible,  and  we  trust  may  be  spared  man\'  years  in  which  to  prose- 
cute his  useful  labors. 


.1.  W.  (iAltVKV. 


GEOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE  AS  THE 
WORD  OF  GOD,  AND  THE  ONLY  RULE  OF 
FAITH  AND  PRACTICE. 

PROF.  J.  W.  m'GAEVEY. 

DEFINITIONS. 

IiT  order  to  free  the  terms  in  which  'our  theme  is  expressed 
from  all  apparent  ambiguity,  and  to  make  perfectly  clear 
its  meaning,  we  commence  with  a  few  definitions. 

In  saying  that  we  receive  the  Bible  as  the  word  of  God,  we 
distinguish  between  the  word  of  God  and  the  words  of  God. 
We  do  not  mean  that  all  of  its  words  are  words  of  God;  for 
some  of  them  are  recorded  as  the  words  of  angels,  some  as  the 
words  of  men,  some  as  those  of  demons,  and  some  as  those  of 
Satan.  We  mean  that  it  is  God's  word  in  the  sense  that  God, 
by  the  inspiration  of  its  writers,  caused  to  be  written  this 
record  of  things  that  were  said  and  done  by  himself  and  certain 
of  his  creatures. 

In  saying  that  we  receive  this  book  as  the  only  rule  of  faith, 
we  mean,  first,  that  we  receive  all  of  its  utterances  as  true  in 
the  sense  which  properly  belongs  to  them,  and  therefore  as 
objects  of  belief;  and  second,  that  nothing  else,  as  a  matter 
of  religious  belief,  is  to  be  required  of  us.  Of  course  this  does 
not  bind  us  to  any  book  now  printed  in  the  Bible  which  may 
prove  to  have  been  improperly  inserted,  or  to  any  passage  in 
any  book  which  may  prove  to  be  an  uninspired  interpolation. 
In  receiving  it  as  the  only  rule  of  practice,  we  bind  ourselves  in 
conscience  to  observe  all  that  it  appoints  for  us  to  do,  distin- 
guishing what  it  appoints  for  us  from  what  it  appointed  for 
others  in  former  dispensations ;  and  we  refuse  to  be  bound  by 
anything  which  it  does  not  thus  appoint. 

(11) 


12  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

By  the  "we"  in  our  proposition,  is  meant,  not  the  writer  of 
this  essay,  nor  the  writers  of  the  essays  in  this  volume,  nor  the 
particular  body  of  disciples  with  which  these  writers  are  identi- 
fied; but  all,  everywhere,  who  do  thus  receive  the  Bible.  Many, 
it  is  true,  receive  the  Bible  as  the  word  of  God  who  do  not 
receive  it  as  the  only  rule  of  faith  and  practice ;  and  we  shall 
accordingly  divide  the  question,  discussing  first  the  grounds  on 
which  the  book  is  received  in  the  former  sense,  and  afterward 
the  grounds  on  which  it  is  received  in  the  1  atucr  sense. 

There  is  siill  another  distinction  which  must  be  noted  before 
we  enter  upon  our  principal  theme.  While  the  "we"  whose 
grounds  of  belief  are  to  be  stated,  includes  all  believers,  all  do 
not  receive  it  on  the  same  grounds.  There  is  a  great  diversity 
in  this  respect.  In  order  that  all  may  be  properly  represented 
in  the  statements  which  are  to  be  made,  it  is  necessary  to 
present  these  various  grounds,  and  to  consider  them  separately. 
Believers  may  be  divided,  in  reference  to  their  grounds  of  belief, 
into  three  classes ;  first,  the  uneducated,  who  have  never  made 
a  study  of  the  evidences  of  Christianity ;  second,  the  more  intel- 
ligent class,  who  have  paid  more  or  less  attention  to  the 
subject,  but  have  never  studied  it  systematically ;  and  third, 
those  who  have  investigated  the  subject  exhaustively.  This 
classification  of  believers  shall  guide  us  in  marking  divisions 
in  this  part  of  our  essay. 

/.    THE  NAUBOWEST  GROUND  OF  BELIEF. 

A  large  majority  of  the  believers  of  this  age,  and  of  every 
age  except  the  earliest,  have  received  the  Bible  as  the  word  of 
God  on  the  one  and  only  ground  that  they  have  been  so  edu 
cated.  They  have  been  trained  from  their  earliest  childhood  to 
look  upon  the  Bible  as  a  sacred  book ;  to  reverence  it  as  a  most 
precious  gift  from  God  ;  to  abhor  unbelief  in  reference  to  it  as 
a  deadly  sin,  and  to  tremble  when  the  least  shadow  of  doubt 


GROUNDS  OX  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  13 

concerning  it  passes  across  their  minds.  They  have  learned  to 
estimate  the  truth  of  all  other  writings  by  their  agreement  or 
disagreement  with  this  ;  and  they  fully  expect  to  be  judged  by 
it  in  the  day  of  final  accounts.  If  they  are  called  upon  to  give 
a  reason  for  this  implicit  faith^  they  seldom  go  farther  than  to 
answer,  "  We  have  been  brought  up  to  believe  the  Bible ;  our 
fathers  and  mothers  before  us  have  believed  it ;  and  we  have 
never  thought  of  doubting  it." 

This  ground  of  faith  has  not  received  the  respectful  consid- 
eration to  which  it  is  entitled.  It  is  often  stigmatized  as 
purely  traditional  and  unreasoning  ;  and  so  it  appears  to  be. 
But  is  it  any  the  less  valuable  on  this  account  ?  On  what  de- 
pends the  value  of  faith  in  anything  that  is  of  a  practical 
nature  ?  On  the  reasons  which  the  believer  can  give  for  his 
faita  ?  or  on  the  firmness  with  which  he  maintains  his  faith, 
and  the  exactness  with  which  he  puts  it  into  practice  ?  Faith 
in  the  genuineness  of  medicines,  in  the  skill  of  physicians,  in 
the  honesty  of  men  of  business,  in  the  accuracy  of  interest 
tables  and  of  logarithms,  in  the  constancy  of  friendship  and  of 
marital  vows,  in  everything  on  which  life  and  well-being  de- 
pend, derives  its  value  from  the  latter  consideration,  and  not  at 
all  from  the  former.  If  the  religion  taught  in  the  Bible  is  true, 
the  blessings  which  it  offers  to  men  are  bestowed  on  those  who 
believe,  and  who  live  in  accordance  with  their  faith,  without  the 
slightest  regard  to  the  reasons  or  the  causes  which  induced 
them  to  believe.  This  is  true  not  only  of  the  blessings  which  it 
offers  as  the  special  gifts  of  Grod,  but  also  of  those  noble  traits 
of  character  which  this  faith  brings  forth  as  its  natural  fruits. 
Not  one  of  these  is  dependent  on  the  reasons  which  induce  men 
to  believe.    This  fact  cannot  be  emphasized  too  strongly. 

This  ground  of  faith  has  been  pronounced  not  only  tradi- 
tional and  unreasoning,  but  insufiicient  for  the  trials  to  which 
faith  must  be  subjected.  For  some  persons  it  has  proved  insuf- 
ficient ;  and  these  have  either  abandoned  the  faith,  or  found 


14 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 


better  ground  for  believing  ;  but  it  has  proved  sufficient  for  the 
majority  of  believers  in  ages  past,  and  it  Avill  for  ages  to  come. 
If  the  good  results  of  faith  are  dependent,  not  on  the  causes  of 
it,  but  on  its  steadfastness  and  its  fruits,  it  follows  that  a  faith 
which  does  not  waver,  and  which  brings  forth  these  fruits  to  the 
end  of  life,  has  a  sufficient  basis  in  which  to  rest.  The  faith  of 
the  class  now  under  consideration  does  remain  steadfast  to  the 
end,  and  it  does  bring  forth  the  required  fruits.  Myriads  of 
them  are  now  living,  and  myriads  more  have  gone  to  rest,  the 
shield  of  whose  faith  was  never  pierced  by  a  single  dart  of  un- 
belief. These  believers  met  the  arguments  of  infidelity,  so  far 
as  they  encountered  them,  with  a  smile  or  a  frown,  according  to 
the  temperament  of  each  ;  they  pitied  the  infidel  as  an  unfortu- 
nate and  wayward  man  ;  they  turned  to  their  Bibles  with 
greater  confidence  and  affijction  in  proportion  as  it  was  as- 
sailed; they  walked  humbly  with  their  God,  and  truly  with 
their  neighbors  ;  and  in  the  hour  of  death  they  were  not  afraid. 
It  is  offered  as  an  objection,  that  the  same  may  be  truly  said 
of  faith  in  other  books,  supposed  to  be  sacred,  and  in  other 
religions  which  are  conceded  to  be  of  human  origin.  As  re- 
spects the  ground  of  faith,  this  must  be  admitted ;  but  what 
follows  ?  It  does  not  follow  that  all  books  and  religions  thus 
received  are  equally  true  and  equally  beneficial  to  their  ad- 
herents. The  claims  of  each  to  be  true  depend  on  the  evi- 
dences which  can  be  adduced  in  its  favor ;  and  this  is  sup- 
posed to  be  beyond  the  ken  of  the  humble  believers  of  whom 
we  now  speak.  If  any  one  of  these  religions  is  true  and 
divine,  the  believer  in  it  reaps  all  the  good  fruits  of  it ;  and  if 
any  is  false,  the  believer  in  it  reaps  all  the  good  that  is  in  it,  if 
any,  and  he  also  just  as  certainly  tastes  all  the  bitter  fruits 
which  a  false  system  must  necessarily  bear.  The  objection, 
then,  is  without  weight ;  and  the  ground  on  which  a  countless 
host  of  God's  children  have  rested  their  faith  is  vindicated.  It 
has  proved  sufficient  for  them,  though  many  of  them  have 


OBOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 


15 


passed  through  mach  tribulation  to  the  region  in  which  they 
had  laid  up  their  treasures. 

II.    BBOADEB  GBOUNDS  OF  BELIEF. 

The  preceding  ground,  satisfying  as  it  is  to  the  mass  of  un- 
educated believers,  has  proved  insufficient  for  those  who,  either 
from  the  natural  questionings  of  awakened  thought,  or  from  the 
attacks  of  unbelievers,  have  been  constrained  to  ask  whether 
education  has  guided  them  aright.  All  these  inquire  for  the 
grounds  on  which  their  teachers  have  taught  them,  and  they 
pass  into  the  second  or  into  the  third  class  mentioned  above, 
according  to  the  extent  of  their  subsequent  investigations. 

1.  Most  commonly,  the  first  new  ground  to  which  these 
awakened  minds  advance,  is  this :  they  look  to  see  who  the 
teachers  of  their  faith  are ;  and  they  find  that  they  constitute 
the  overwhelming  majority  of  the  good,  the  wise  and  the 
learned,  of  this  and  of  all  past  ages  up  to  the  age  in  which 
the  Bible  became  a  completed  book.  They  see  that  these  men 
constitute  the  class  best  informed  on  the  subject,  and  most 
likely,  both  on  this  account  and  on  account  of  their  goodness 
of  heart,  to  decide  the  question  correctly.  They  ascertain,  too, 
that  many  of  these  men  were  converted  from  unbelief  to  belief, 
as  the  result  of  their  investigations  ;  and  although  they  find 
that  some  have  reversed  this  process,  the  number  of  the  latter 
is  so  small  in  comparison  as  not  to  seriously  afiect  the  evi- 
dence. 

That  this  is  solid  ground  on  which  to  stand  is  made  more 
obvious  when  we  reflect  that  it  is  the  very  ground  on  which  the 
deductions  of  science  are  received  by  the  mass  of  mankind. 
We  accept  what  we  are  taught  concerning  the  geography  of 
distant  lands,  concerning  geology,  astronomy,  chemistry,  and 
the  facts  of  all  history,  because  we  have  confidence  in  our 
teachers ;  and  if  their  deductions  are  called  in  question  by  a 


16 


GJROUXDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 


man  here  and  there,  it  is  sufficient  for  us  that  his  objections 
amount  to  nothing  in  the  estimation  of  the  great  majority  of 
those  who  are  competent  judges.  It  is  only  the  very  few  who 
are  competent  to  investigate  these  sciences  for  themselves  ;  and 
the  rest  of  us  are  never  reproached  because  we  accept  our 
faith  from  their  hands.  Scientific  men  who  are  thus  credited 
by  their  less-informed  neighbors,  should  be  the  last  men  on 
earth  to  censure  Christians  for  receiving  the  Bible  on  similar 
ground. 

It  is  said,  however,  that  this  ground  of  faith  depends  en- 
tirely on  the  circumstance  that  in  the  past  the  majority  has 
been  on  the  side  of  belief,  and  that  should  the  majority  at 
some  future  time  turn  the  other  way,  the  argument  would  be 
reversed,  and  would  become  equally  strong  in  favor  of  unbelief. 
This  is  unquestionably  true.  The  argument  would  be  reversed, 
and  the  state  of  opinion  among  the  common  people  would  be 
reversed  with  it.  This  would  be  true  on  any  ground  of  faith, 
for  the  common  people  always  have  been  and  always  will  be 
governed  in  their  opinions  on  all  subjects  by  the  conclusions  of 
the  great  majority  of  those  who  are  known  to  be  more  compe- 
tent judges  than  themselves.  Should  infidelity  ever  secure  this 
majority,  the  Bible,  having  lost  the  officers  of  its  army,  would 
of  course  be  deserted  by  the  rank  and  file.  But  we  need  not 
anticipate  such  a  day.  If  the  Bible  is  from  God,  it  can  never 
come. 

2.  Others  of  the  class  now  under  consideration,  while  hold- 
ing firmly  to  the  ground  of  faith  last  mentioned,  look  still 
farther,  and,  considering  the  effects  which  faith  in  the  Bible  has 
had  on  all  true  and  consistent  believers,  they  find  that  these 
effects  are  good  and  only  good  continually.  They  find  that 
only  those  believers  who  have  not  conformed  their  lives  to  the 
requirements  of  the  book  have  failed  to  realize  these  good 
effects  ;  and  that  those  who  have  conformed  to  it  most  neai-ly 
have  been  the  purest  and  best  of  men.    They  cannot  believe 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  TEE  BIBLE. 


17 


that  such  traits  are  wrought  iuto  human  character  by  the  belief 
of  a  book  whose  writers  are  impostors,  and  whose  distinctive 
claim  for  itself  is  a  falsehood.  They  cannot  believe  this,  be- 
cause they  have  learned  by  their  own  experience,  and  by  that 
of  those  who  have  gone  before  them,  that  the  belief  of  false- 
hood is  injurious  to  men,  while  the  belief  of  truth  alone  is 
truly  and  permanently  beneficial.  Many  eminent  unbelievers 
have  themselves  admitted  that  the  highest  ideal  of  human  life 
would  be  attained  if  men  would  live  according  to  the  require- 
ments of  this  book,  and  thus  out  of  their  own  mouths  we  con- 
firm the  solidity  of  this  ground  of  belief. 

A  feeble  attempt  has  been  made  to  ofiset  this  argument  by 
pointing  to  a  very  few  men  in  heathen  lands  who  have  lived 
very  noble  lives  and  taught  a  very  pure  morality,  though  they 
never  saw  or  heard  of  the  Bible ;  but  to  this  it  is  truly  an- 
swered that  the  life  of  the  noblest  man  who  ever  lived  in 
heathen  lands  cannot  compare  to  those  of  thousands  who  have 
believed  the  Bible  ;  and  that  only  so  far  as  the  lives  and  pre- 
cepts of  these  noble  heathens  are  in  harmony  with  the  teach- 
ings of  the  Bible,  is  there  anything  in  them  to  be  admired. 
The  fact,  then,  instead  of  being  an  objection  to  our  argument, 
only  confirms  it  by  furnishing  additional  proof  of  the  ennobling 
effects  of  that  which  our  Bible  teaches. 

3.  A  third  ground  for  the  faith  of  the  second  class  of  be- 
lievers is  one  not  so  easily  defined,  but  fully  as  substantial  as 
either  of  the  preceding.  It  is  the  stamp  of  truthfulness  which 
is  felt  rather  than  seen  as  they  read  the  Bible  and  reflect  on  its 
contents.  They  have  observed  that  false  narratives,  even  when 
most  plausible,  have  an  indefinable  air  or  tone  about  them 
which  awakens  suspicion  and  causes  us  to  pause  and  hesitate 
about  receiving  them  ;  and  that,  on  the  other  hand,  there  is  an 
air  or  tone  about  truth  which  asserts  itself  and  dissipates 
doubt.    It  is  comparable  to  the  ring  of  a  sound  bell,  or  of  a 

piece  of  sound  porcelain,  as  distinguished  from  that  of  one 
2 


18  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  EECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 


slightly  cracked.  More  profound  thinkers  may  be  able  to 
analyze  and  define  the  characteristics  of  truth  and  error  alluded 
to,  but  our  second  class  of  believers  make  no  such  attempt. 
The  human  mind  is  made  for  the  reception  of  truth,  and  when 
it  is  uncorrupted  it  has  a  natural  susceptibility  to  truth,  an- 
alogous to  that  of  the  eye  to  light,  and  of  the  ear  to  sound, 
which  enables  it  within  certain  limits  to  recognize  both  truth 
and  falsehood.  This  instinct  is  no  guide  in  matters  of  a  purely 
scientific  character;  but  in  matters  of  history  and  morals  it 
will  assert  itself,  and  its  promptings  are  often  irresistible.  A 
juryman  is  often  led  by  it  to  decide  cases  of  property  and  life, 
when  the  explicit  testimony  would  have  led  him  in  the  op- 
posite direction.  Now  those  of  whom  I  speak  feel,  as  they 
read  their  Bibles  from  day  to  day  and  year  to  year,  that  they 
are  in  mental  and  spiritual  contact  with  narratives  and  pre- 
cepts which  have  the  ring  of  truth  about  them.  They  feel  this 
so  distinctly,  and  it  impresses  them  so  deeply,  that  they  can- 
not shake  it  off  if  they  would,  and  they  cannot  attempt  to  do 
so  without  doing  violence  to  their  moral  nature. 

It  will  be  admitted  that  if  God  were  in  any  proper  sense 
the  author  of  the  Bible,  it  would  bear  these  marks  of  its  own 
truthfulness.  Indeed,  if  he  inspired  its  authors,  he  must  have 
desired  that  his  creatures  should  believe  its  statements  and  ob- 
serve its  precepts  ;  and  he  would  certainly  impart  this  very 
quality  to  it.  The  fact,  then,  that  the  Bible  has  the  identical 
eflect  on  a  vast  multitude  of  its  readers  which  its  author  must 
have  designed  if  that  author  is  God,  is  no  mean  proof  that  God 
is  its  author.  This  evidence  can  have  but  little  effect  on  those 
who  are  as  yet  unbelievers,  and  who  consequently  do  not  re- 
ceive the  impression  we  refer  to ;  but  it  is  solid  and  satisfactory 
evidence  to  all  those  who  have  for  this  and  other  reasons  com- 
bined received  the  book  as  true,  and  studied  it  for  the  good 
that  is  in  it. 

4.    The  next  ground  on  which  we  plant  our  feet  is  found  in 


GROUNDS  ON  WEIGH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  19 

the  incomparable  character  of  Him  who  is  the  central  figure  in 
the  panorama  which  the  Bible  spreads  out  before  us.  Friends 
and  foes  alike  admit  that  Jesus  who  is  called  the  Christ  oc- 
cupies this  position.  He  is  the  centre  and  soul  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, and,  whether  unbelievers  will  have  it  or  not,  the  law 
and  the  prophets  all  pointed  to  him  as  their  end.  Now  when 
we  consider  who  the  writers  of  the  Bible  were,  what  they  were 
in  their  education,  in  their  prejudices,  in  their  hopes,  and  in 
their  conceptions  of  humanity,  we  are  driven  to  the  conclusion 
that  it  was  impossible  for  them  to  either  conceive  or  depict  such 
a  character  as  Jesus.  This  argument  has  been  set  forth  by 
eloquent  writers  in  whole  volumes ;  and  it  has  often  been  said 
that  the  conception  and  portrayal  of  such  a  character  by  these 
writers  without  divine  inspiration  would  have  been  a  greater 
miracle  than  any  which  Jesus  is  said  to  have  wrought.  Of 
course  the  word  miracle  is  here  used  in  its  etymological  sense 
of  a  mere  wonder,  and  not  in  its  scriptural  sense  of  an  imme- 
diate act  of  God.  Though  so  often  and  so  confidently  pub- 
lished to  the  world,  this  argument  has  never  met  with  a  serious 
answer,  so  far  as  the  present  writer  is  informed.  Until  it  shall 
be  proved  to  be  without  force,  we  must  be  allowed  to  still  be- 
lieve that  the  Bible  is  the  book  of  God,  for  this  reason,  even  if 
we  should  be  compelled  to  lay  aside  all  others. 

5.  As  a  result  of  mature  reflection  on  the  last  two  grounds 
of  faith,  there  spreads  out  before  the  believer  another  field  of 
evidence,  in  which  he  beholds  a  wondrous  adaptation  of  this 
book  to  the  spiritual  wants  of  our  fallen  race.  That  we  are 
sinners  before  God,  is  the  profound  conviction  of  every  thought- 
ful soul  who  realizes  the  existence  of  a  divine  being  to  whom 
we  are  responsible  for  our  conduct.  Every  such  person  feels  the 
need  of  something  to  impress  upon  him  a  keener  sense  of  his 
unworthiness,  to  deliver  him  from  the  guilt  which  he  has 
already  incurred,  and  to  give  him  ability  to  resist  the  entice- 
ments of  sin.    He  looks  in  vain  for  deliverance  and  strength  to 


20 


GBOUNDS  ON  WUICn  WE  RECEIVE  TEE  BIBLE. 


all  the  systems  of  human  philosophy,  and  to  all  the  religions 
of  earth  except  that  of  the  Bible.  In  the  revelations  of  this 
book  he  finds  what  he  desires  ;  or  rather,  he  finds  that  which, 
whether  consciously  sought  or  not,  meets  and  satisfies  the 
longings  of  his  soul.  He  finds  in  this  book,  as  he  thoughtfully 
and  believingly  reads  it,  power  to  subdue  his  stubborn  will,  and 
to  bring  him  in  humble  penitence  to  the  foot-stool  of  the  God 
whom  it  reveals.  He  finds  in  the  tender  mercy  there  offen^d  to 
him  through  the  atoning  blood  of  a  wondrous  Redeemer,  whose 
work  is  the  characteristic  and  the  glory  of  this  religious  system, 
the  only  conceivable  release  from  the  burden  of  his  guilt ;  for 
only  in  forgivenesss,  free  and  final,  can  the  guilty  soul  find 
peace.  Receiving  "this  heavenly  gift,  he  enjoys  a  peace  of  mind 
which  passes  all  understanding.  Starting  forward  afresh  in 
the  journey  of  life,  he  finds  the  same  good  book  furnishing  him 
with  hopes,  and  gratitude,  and  courage,  which  enable  him  to 
control  himself  as  no  other  man  can,  by  maxims  of  wisdom 
and  holiness  which  gradually  transform  him  into  the  spiritual 
image  of  his  God,  and  fit  him  to  dwell  with  God  forever.  With 
this  experience,  he  cannot  doubt  that  the  book  which  has  en- 
abled him  to  attain  it,  and  which  claims  to  be  the  Avord  of 
God,  is  all  that  it  claims  to  be. 

6.  Some  of  the  class  of  believers  now  under  consideration 
have  extended  their  readings  into  general  history  and  the  his- 
tory of  the  church.  All  such  have  learned  that  the  claim  of 
the  Bible  to  be  the  word  of  God  has  passed  through  fiery  trials 
in  the  course  of  its  history,  such  as  would  long  since  have 
brought  it  into  contempt  had  it  not  been  too  well  grounded  to 
be  overthrown.  If  the  book  had  come  down  through  the  ages 
unchallenged,  the  continued  hold  which  it  had  on  the  confidence 
of  men  would  argue  little  in  its  favor ;  but  instead  of  this,  its 
claim  has  been  hotly  contested  by  men  of  genius  and  learning 
from  the  second  century  after  Christ  until  the  present  time. 
All  manner  of  literary  weapons  have  been  wielded  against  it, 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  21 

including  the  sneers  of  scoffers,  the  ridicule  of  the  giddy  and 
profligate,  the  criticisms  of  men  of  letters,  the  deductions  of 
philosophers,  and  the  researches  of  historians.  ^Decipherers  of 
manuscrij)ts  and  hieroglyphics,  students  of  archaeology,  delvers 
in  the  bowels  of  the  earth,  explorers  of  the  solar  system  and  of 
the  stellar  universe,  analyzers  of  historical  documents,  and  ex- 
perts in  comparative  philology,  have  unitedly  and  separately 
assailed  the  Bible,  many  times  proclaiming  that  they  had  put 
all  of  its  friends  to  flight,  and  that  soon  it  would  have  no  in- 
telligent man  to  uphold  its  claims  ;  bat  through  all  these  con- 
flicts it  has  passed  without  loss  in  the  number  of  its  friends, 
and  not  only  without  loss,  but  with  an  ever-increasing  number 
who  insist  that  it  is  the  word  of  God.  The  enemies  of  the 
book  are  boldly  challenged  to  tell  how  this  can  be,  if  the  high 
claim  set  up  for  it  is  false,  or  even  doubtful. 

This  challenge  is  answered  \)y  the  statement  that  the  tena- 
cious hold  which  the  Bible  has  on  the  minds  of  men  is  the  re- 
sult of  superstition,  and  of  an  obstinate  conservatism  w^hich  is 
natural  to  our  race.  The  answer  is  refuted  by  the  fact  that  it 
is  not  the  superstitious  part  of  our  race,  nor  the  part  most  given 
to  blind  conservatism,  that  has  thus  clung  to  the  Bible.  That 
portion  of  the  race  most  given  to  these  two  weaknesses  is 
found  where  the  Bible  is  unknown,  or  is  made  subordinate  to 
other  rules  of  faith,  as  among  Mohammedans  and  Buddhists. 
On  the  other  hand,  those  nations  which  have  shown  themselves 
freest  of  all  from  superstition,  and  quickest  of  all  to  cast  aside 
old  errors  and  to  seize  upon  new  truths,  are  the  very  nations 
which  have  clung  most  tenaciously  to  the  Bible.  Not  only  so, 
but  the  class  of  men  in  these  nations  most  noted  for  faith  in  the 
Bible,  includes  in  it  leaders  in  human  thought  in  every  depart- 
ment of  learning.  To  such  an  extent  is  this  true,  that  when 
unbelievers  of  real  learning  and  talent  have  for  a  time  become 
leaders  of  great  bodies  of  men,  they  have,  as  a  rule,  soon  lost 
their  leadership  as  a  result  of  defeat  in  the  conflicts  which 


22  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

their  attacks  on  the  Bible  have  provoked.  More  than  two  or 
three  might  be  named,  who,  in  the  memory  of  persons  now  liv- 
ing, have  attained  to  such  leadership  and  then  lost  it. 

Now  this  whole  series  of  battles  has  been  fought  over  the 
single  question,  whether  the  Bible  is  the  word  of  God,  in 
the  sense  of  our  proposition.  The  proposition  has  thus  far 
been  so  triumphantly  maintained  as  to  inspire  us  with  the 
strongest  conviction  that  it  is  true,  and  that  it  will  continue  to 
be  maintained  in  the  estimation  of  an  ever  increasing  number 
of  persons,  until  at  last  there  shall  be  none  to  call  it  in  ques- 
tion. The  Bible  has  to-day  an  immensely  wider  recognition 
among  men  than  at  any  previous  period  in  its  history.  More 
copies  of  it  are  now  annually  published  and  sold  than  ever 
before ;  more,  perhaps,  than  of  any  one  thousand  other  books 
combined.  It  is  printed  and  read  as  no  other  book  ever 
has  been  or  ever  will  be,  in  all  the  languages  of  the  earth 
which  have  an  alphabet,  while  many  of  these  languages  have 
been  provided  with  alphabets  for  the  very  purpose  that  the 
Bible  might  be  printed  in  them.  It  is  one  of  the  most  won- 
derful events  of  this  present  century  of  wonders,  that  on 
May  1st,  1881,  when  the  Revised  Version  of  the  English  Jfew 
Testament  was  published,  more  than  one  million  copies  were 
sold  in  a  single  day,  and  this  among  the  people  of  all  the  earth 
who  already  had  in  hand  the  largest  number  of  New  Testa- 
ments. There  is  nothing  comparable  to  this  in  the  history  of 
books.  These  facts  guarantee  that  its  power  over  the  next  gen- 
eration will  be  far  greater  and  more  world-wide  than  it  is  now. 
Indeed,  if  we  judge  the  future  by  the  rules  of  ordinary  foresight, 
the  facilities  which  now  exist  for  the  free  circulation  of  this 
book  throughout  the  world,  and  the  multitude  of  rich  and  pow- 
erful friends  who  esteem  it  a  high  privilege  to  expend  fabulous 
suras  of  money  to  put  it  into  the  hands  of  every  human  being, 
argue  a  future  for  it  which  is  far  more  glorious  than  its  most 
enthusiastic  friends  have  dreamed,  or  Christian  poets  have  sung. 


OROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  23 

A  book  with  such  a  history  and  such  prospects,  all  due  to 
the  fact  that  it  is  believed  to  be  the  word  of  God,  cannot  be 
standing  on  a  false  claim,  if  there  is  any  such  thing  as  distin- 
guishing between  documents  that  are  false  and  those  that  are 
true.  On  this  ground  we  rest  our  faith ;  and  we  feel  that  in 
doing  so  we  would  be  standing  on  a  rock,  if  there  was  nothing 
else  beneath  our  feet.  But  we  stand  not  on  this  alone.  We 
step  backward  and  forward  on  the  six  different  grounds  which 
WB  have  enumerated,  with  no  uncertainty  in  our  tread ;  and 
when  we  think  of  them  all,  we  realize  that  the  believer  has 
within  his  reach,  if  he  will  reflect  soberl}^,  and  read  but  a  little 
outside  of  his  Bible,  abundant  evidence  to  satisfy  an  honest 
soul,  and  to  defend  his  faith  against  the  assaults  of  unbelief. 

III.    THE  BROADEST  GROUNDS  OF  BELIEF. 

The  third  class  of  believers  is  composed  of  those  who  have 
made  a  thorough,  systematic  and  scientific  investigation  of  all 
the  grounds  on  which  an  intelligent  faith  can  rest.  They  have 
pursued  the  following  lines  of  inquiry,  though  not  always  in 
the  order  in  which  we  name  them. 

1.  Knowing  that  all  books  written  so  long  ago  as  the  books 
of  the  Bible,  were  transmitted  to  posterity  for  many  centuries 
by  means  of  manuscript  copies  not  always  made  with  proper 
care ;  and  that  some  ancient  books  have  undergone  changes 
from  this  cause  such  as  to  render  the  latest  copies  extremely 
inaccurate ;  they  have  first  inquired  as  to  the  preservation  of 
the  text  of  the  sacred  books,  so  as  to  know  whether  they  have 
suffered  in  like  manner.  They  are  aware  that  even  Avere 
the  Bible  originally  the  word  of  God,  it  is  valueless  now,  if 
human  hands  have  changed  it  to  such  an  extent  that  we  cannot 
know  what  parts  remain  as  they  were  first  written  ;  and  they 
also  know  that  if  any  part  remains  unchanged,  this  much  is 
still  the  word  of  God  if  it  was  so  at  the  beginning.    If  this  in- 


24  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

quiry  ends  in  proving  that  the  books  have  lost  their  essential 
character  in  transmission,  we  need  to  proceed  no  farther  witli 
our  investigation ;  but  if  otherwise,  we  then  take  another  step, 
and  inquire  into  their  origin  and  original  character. 

It  is  perhaps  impossible  to  copy  a  book  of  considerable  size 
with  a  pen,  without  making  some  mistakes  ;  and  the  more  fre- 
quently it  is  thus  copied,  each  copyist  using  the  work  of  his 
predecessor,  the  greater  the  number  of  mistakes  in  the  later 
copies.  The  multiplication  of  copies  is  the  multiplication  of 
errors.  Not  so  with  printing.  On  the  contrary,  when  the  types 
are  once  correctly  set,  all  copies  printed  from  them  are  exactly 
alike,  and  they  may  be  multiplied  to  any  extent  without  mis- 
takes. As  a  consequence,  the  inquiry  as  to  the  preservation  of 
the  text  of  the  Bible  is  limited  in  time  to  the  period  between 
its  first  composition  and  the  invention  of  printing,  or,  at  the 
latest,  to  the  time  when  printing  became  an  accurate  art.  This 
was  in  the  early  part  of  the  sixteenth  century,  the  first  printed 
copy  of  any  part  of  the  Bible  having  been  put  to  press  about  the 
middle  of  the  century  previous.  Errors  of  copyists  then  came 
to  an  end,  and  our  question  is,  how  many  and  how  serious  were 
the  errors  introduced  previous  to  that  time  ? 

The  investigation  of  this  question  was  begun  in  earnest 
about  the  close  of  the  seventeenth  century,  and  it  has  been  pro- 
secuted with  great  diligence  till  the  present  time.  Many  emi- 
nent men  have  devoted  their  whole  lives  to  it,  and  others,  the 
labor  of  many  years.  They  have  ransacked  the  ancient  libra- 
ries of  Europe,  Africa  and  western  Asia,  in  search  of  manu- 
script copies  of  the  New  Testament,  and  have  found  more  than 
two  thousand  of  them,  some  containing  the  whole  New  Testa- 
ment, but  the  great  majority  only  parts  of  it.  These  they  have 
compared  with  one  another,  word  by  word,  and  letter  by  letter, 
noting  every  variation.  They  have  also  taken  up  the  ancient 
translations  of  the  book,  determined  the  Greek  words  from 
which  the  renderings  in  them  were  made,  and  compared  these 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  25 


with  the  words  of  the  manuscripts.  In  most  instances  the 
translations  thus  used  Avere  made  from  Greek  copies  of  an 
earlier  date  than  that  of  any  manuscript  now  in  existence  ;  and 
thus  they  represent  a  Greek  text  nearer  to  the  autographs  of  tlie 
sacred  penmen.  They  have  also  gathered  out  of  the  writings 
of  early  Christian  authors,  authors  who  lived  anterior  to  the 
date  of  existing  manuscripts,  the  quotations  which  they  made 
from  copies  in  use  in  their  days,  and  have  compared  these  with 
the  same  passages  in  versions  and  existing  manuscripts.  Hav- 
ing thus  exhausted  the  sources  of  information  as  to  how  these 
books  have  read,  in  every  line  and  word,  and  in  every  age  of 
their  existence,  they  have  qualified  themselves  to  state  with  the 
certainty  of  exact  knowledge,  to  what  extent  the  text  of  the 
New  Testament  has  been  preserved  in  its  original  form.  The 
results  may  be  briefly  stated  as  follows  : 

a.  The  manuscripts,  versions  and  quotations  agree  to  such 
an  extent  as  to  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the  original  reading  of 
seven-eighths  of  the  whole  text,  in  word  and  letter.  In  other 
words,  seven-eighths  of  the  words  originally  written  in  these 
books  have  been  preserved  in  existing  copies  precisely  as  they 
were  at  first.  This  much  is  unquestionably  the  word  of  God 
now,  if  it  ever  was. 

b.  So  large  a  number  of  the  variations  between  copies  con- 
sist in  mere  mistakes  in  spelling,  which  do  not  obscure  the 
identity  of  the  misspelt  words,  that  when  these  are  taken  out  of 
the  account,  as  they  should  be,  fifty-nine  sixtieths  of  all  the 
words  are  found  to  be  unchanged. 

c.  The  number  of  changes  in  the  text  which  affect  the 
meaning,  and  require  the  skill  of  the  critic  to  determine  the 
original  reading,  is  only  about  one-thousandth  part  of  the 
whole,  and  these  have  been  so  marked  in  printed  copies  by  text- 
ual critics,  that  a  scholar  can  put  his  finger  on  every  one  of 
them. 

d.  By  combining  the  results  of  these  investigations,  and 


26  OBOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  BECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

throwing  out  from  the  text  known  errors,  textual  critics  have 
now  presented  us  with  a  Greek  Testament  which  contains  the 
exact  Avords  written  by  its  authors,  and  this  without  the  least 
doubt,  except  in  specified  instances. 

e.  An  examination  of  the  few  passages  of  which  the  read- 
ings are  still  doubtful,  reveals  the  fact  that  if  we  should  erase 
from  the  book  all  of  these  passages,  we  would  lose  from  our 
New  Testament  not  a  single  precept,  promise,  or  fact,  of  mate- 
rial importance ;  for  all  such  which  might  be  affected  by  the 
erasure  are  found  in  other  passages,  w^hich  are  undoubtedly 
genuine. 

f.  These  results  are  accessible  not  to  the  learned  alone; 
but  they  have  been  placed  within  the  reach  of  all  who  can  read 
the  English  language,  by  means  of  the  Revised  English  version. 
This  version  is  not  only  translated  from  the  corrected  Greek 
text,  but  it  exhibits  in  marginal  notes,  intelligible  to  the  un- 
learned reader,  every  word  in  regard  to  the  genuineness  of 
which  there  remains  the  least  doubt,  and  it  indicates  the  de- 
gree of  doubtfulness  which  attaches  to  each. 

On  the  question,  then,  of  the  preservation  of  the  original 
text  of  the  New  Testament,  a  question  which  was  once  regarded 
as  fraught  with  extreme  danger  to  the  cause  of  the  Bible,  all 
apprehension  has  passed  away  ;  the  enemies  of  the  book  are 
silenced,  and  its  friends  are  satisfied.  For  all  time  to  come, 
unless  the  art  of  printing  shall  be  lost,  the  question  will  never 
be  raised  again.  It  is,  indeed,  one  of  the  marvels  of  this  mar- 
velous age,  that  now,  after  the  passage  of  seventeen  centuries, 
we  have  a  purer  text  of  the  Greek  New  Testament  than  has  ex- 
isted since  the  second  century  after  Christ. 

In  regard  to  the  original  text  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  inves- 
tigation has  not  been  completed,  and  the  results  are  not  so  defi- 
nite. Enough  has  been  accomplished,  however,  to  justify  the 
following  statements : 

a.    From  the  second  to  the  sixth  century  after  Christ,  a  sue- 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  27 

cession  of  learned  Jews,  some  living  in  Palestine  and  some  in 
Babylon,  devoted  themselves  to  the  critical  study  of  the  text  of 
their  Bible,  and  brought  into  use  such  rules  to  govern  copyists 
that  the  variations  between  copies  made  at  that  time  are  fewer 
and  more  insignificant  by  far  than  in  the  Greek  manuscripts  of 
the  New  Testament. 

b.  So  far  as  can  be  judged  from  quotations  made  from  the 
Old  Testament  previous  to  the  time  mentioned,  and  by  the 
translations  into  other  tongues,  the  text  had  not  suffered  mate- 
rially before  these  stringent  rules  were  adopted. 

c.  While  this  is  true,  it  is  ascertained  that  in  some  of  the 
books  there  are  interpolations  and  verbal  alterations  made  by 
editors  and  copyists,  but  of  such  a  character  that  they  are  easily 
separated  from  the  text,  and  that  they  do  not  materially  affect 
the  meaning  of  the  passages  in  which  they  occur.  There  are 
also  mistakes  in  names  and  figures,  many  of  which  are  corrected 
in  the  context. 

d.  It  is  liighly  probable  that  there  are  other  changes  of  the 
text  which  have  not  been  detected  and  pointed  out ;  but  it  is 
highly  improbable  that  these  are  any  more  serious  than  those 
mentioned  above  in  the  New  Testament.  We  therefore  feel  safe 
in  the  present  state  of  our  knowledge,  and  can  patiently  await 
the  results  of  further  investigation. 

2.  Having  thus  ascertained  that  the  text  of  the  Bible  has 
been  preserved  to  us  with  all  the  accuracy  necessarj^  to  practical 
purposes,  we  have  next  inquired  whether  the  several  books  can 
be  traced  back  to  the  authors  to  whom  they  are  ascribed. 

This  task  has  been  accomplished  with  respect  to  the  New 
Testament  by  evidence  so  incontestable  that  even  the  most  hos- 
tile critics  admit  it  in  regard  to  the  Apocalypse  and  four  of  the 
most  important  Epistles,  viz.,  Romans,  First  and  Second  Cor- 
intliians,  and  Galatians.  While  denying  the  genuineness  of 
Luke's  Gospel,  Acts  of  Apostles,  Hebrews,  Colossians,  and 
Ephesians,  they  assign  these  to  dates  near  the  close  of  the  first 


28  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

century ;  and  they  place  all  the  others  between  the  years  115 
and  150,  except  Second  Peter,  which  they  bring  down  nearly  to 
the  year  200.  As  the  period  within  which  all  of  the  books  pur- 
port to  have  been  written  is  the  second  half  of  the  lirst  century, 
unbelief  is  crowded  into  very  narrow  ground  by  the  evidence 
which  has  extorted  from  it  these  admissions.  This  evidence  is 
that  of  ancient  manuscript  copies  of  the  Greek  Testament,  of 
which  we  have  two  still  existing  that  were  written  in  the  fourth 
century ;  that  of  catalogues,  or  lists  of  the  books,  made  out  by 
early  Christians,  of  which  Vv'e  have  a  succession  reaching  back 
into  the  second  century  ;  that  of  translations  into  other  tongues, 
of  which  we  have  two  reaching  to  the  middle  of  the  same  cen- 
tury, which  was  in  the  life  time  of  men  who  knew  the  Apostles; 
that  of  quotations  made  from  them  by  early  writers,  of  which 
we  have  some  from  most  of  the  books  and  made  by  men  who 
knew  some  of  the  Apostles  ;  and  that  furnished  by  the  contents 
of  the  books  themselves,  which,  in  the  case  of  every  book,  is 
satisfactory,  and  is  very  strong  for  some  for  which  the  external 
evidence  is  comparatively  weak.  With  this  evidence,  so  nearly 
overcoming  the  resistance  of  the  most  determined  foes  of  the 
Bible,  we  are  satisfied;  and  we  believe  that  all  the  books  in  our 
New  Testament  were  written  in  the  apostolic  age  ;  and  that  they 
were  written  by  the  men  whose  names  they  bear,  with  the  excep- 
tion of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  as  to  the  authorship  of  which 
there  is  difference  of  opinion  among  believers. 

In  regard  to  the  Old  Testament,  the  evidence  on  this  branch 
of  our  inquiry,  like  that  in  regard  to  the  text,  is  not  so  complete, 
owing  to  the  remoteness  of  the  period  into  which  the  inquiry 
leads  us,  and  the  consequent  scarcity  of  documents  from  which 
to  derive  evidence.  In  the  time  of  Christ  all  of  these  books 
unquestionably  existed,  and  constituted,  as  they  do  now,  the 
sacred  Scriptures  of  the  Jews.  Furthermore,  they  had  all  been 
translated  into  Greek,  and  had  been  circulated  in  the  version 
called  the  Septuagint,  or  Alexandrian  version,  for  at  least  one 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  29 

hundred  and  fifty  years  before  Christ :  for  it  is  now  conceded 
that  this  version  was  completed  not  later  than  the  year  150  B. 
C,  and  that  the  first  part  of  it  was  made  as  early  as  280  B.  C. 
This  is  demonstrative  proof  that  the  books  existed  far  back 
toward  the  time  when  the  latest  of  them  was  composed.  This 
much  is  universally  conceded  by  unbelievers,  and  our  field  of 
inquiry,  in  point  of  time,  lies  back  of  that  period. 

All  the  historical  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  together  with 
the  book  of  Job,  are  anonymous  :  that  is,  they  do  not  name  their 
authors.  So  far  as  their  authors  are  known  at  all,  they  are 
known  from  the  testimony  of  other  writers ;  and  the  correctness 
of  our  knowledge  depends  on  the  reliability  of  this  testimony. 
The  most  reliable  of  these  witnesses  are  unquestionably  Christ 
and  his  Apostles.  They  ascribe  the  Pentateuch  to  Moses  ;  the 
prophets,  so  far  as  they  quote  them,  to  the  men  whose  names 
they  bear  ;  and  some  of  the  Psalms  to  David,  who  is  represented 
in  the  book  itself  as  the  composer  of  about  half  of  the  collec- 
tion. Concerning  the  other  anonymous  books  they  give  no  spe- 
cific testimony  ;  but  they  give  us  a  general  warrant  for  receiving 
all,  in  that  all  were  parts  of  the  sacred  Scriptures  which  they  in 
a  general  way  cited  as  the  word  of  God.  This  usage  does  not 
imply  the  certainty  that  no  book,  or  part  of  a  book,  had  been 
improperly  placed  in  the  collection ;  but  it  does  imply  that  no 
large  amount  of  that  kind  of  work  had  been  done — none  which 
would  render  improper  the  general  designation  of  the  collection 
as  the  word  of  God. 

Much  controversy  has  existed  over  the  genuineness  of  most  of 
these  books,  and  the  antiquity  of  others  ;  and  unbelievers  have  not 
hesitated  to  reject  some  which  are  endorsed  by  Jesus  and  the 
Apostles.  It  would  require  a  large  volume  to  set  forth  the  points 
of  argument  in  this  controversy,  and  of  course  it  cannot  be 
attempted  in  this  essay.  It  is  sufficient  for  our  present  purpose 
to  say  that  the  principal  ground  on  which  we  receive  the  Old 
Testament  as  the  word  of  God  is  that  named  above,  the  testi- 


30  O BOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

mony  of  Jesus  Christ  and  his  Apostles.  This  is  sufficient  for  all 
the  demands  of  the  Christian  faith  ;  and  if  it  fails  to  support  any 
particular  book,  on  that  book  our  faith  will  be  found  not  at  all 
dependent. 

8.  Next  after  the  inquiries  concerning  the  preservation  of 
the  text  of  the  Bible,  and  the  genuineness  of  its  books, 
conies  the  question,  whether  the  facts  recorded  in  it  are  credible, 
and  its  revelations  reliable.  If  they  are,  we  can  trust  the  Bible 
implicitly  as  the  word  of  God ;  if  not,  the  conclusions  which  we 
have  thus  far  reached  are  without  value. 

There  are  historical  tests  by  which  the  credibility  of  histor- 
ical documents  is  determined.  We  first  inquire  as  to  the 
sources  of  information  accessible  to  the  writers,  and  used  by 
them.  If  they  speak  from  personal  observation,  being  honest 
men,  or  from  the  testimony  of  eyewitnesses,  they  have  the  high- 
est degree  of  credibility  as  regards  the  facts  recorded.  If  they 
are  more  remote  from  the  facts,  their  credibility  diminishes  pro- 
portionately. As  regards  the  New  Testament  writers,  if  all  of 
them  except  the  author  of  the  Apocalypse,  and  the  author  of  the 
four  great  Pauline  Epistles  lived  after  the  death  of  the  genera- 
tion in  which  the  events  transpired,  as  is  claimed  by  unbeliev- 
ers, their  knowledge  was  traditional,  and  their  records  unrelia- 
ble. This  consideration  accounts  for  the  unanimity  with  which 
this  hypothesis  is  maintained  by  unbelievers.  But  if  these 
writings  were  all  composed,  as  believers  have  to  their  own  satis- 
faction made  out,  by  the  men  to  whom  they  are  credited,  then 
they  are  historical  documents  of  the  first  degree  of  credibility, 
according  to  accepted  rules  of  evidence.  The  latter  conclusion 
has  been  established  by  the  evidences  which  we  have  stated 
above. 

The  second  method  of  testing  such  documents  is  to  compare 
them  with  other  histories  of  the  same  period,  and  note  the  agree- 
ments and  disagreements.  This  comparison  has  been  made  in 
two  ways :  first,  by  comparing  the  references  which  other  writers 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  31 

make  to  New  Testament  facts  witti  the  New  Testament  accounts 
of  them ;  and  second,  by  treating  in  like  manner  the  New  Testa- 
ment allusions  to  events  more  fully  set  forth  by  these  other 
writers.  In  both  ways  the  sacred  books  stand  the  test ;  for 
although  a  few  contradictions  have  been  alleged,  not  one  has 
been  made  out.  On  the  contrary,  a  remarkable  harmony  has 
been  found  to  exist,  a  harmony  which,  when  we  remember  that 
all  these  other  writers  were  hostile  to  the  religion  set  forth  in 
the  New  Testament,  is  accounted  for  only  on  the  supposition  of 
the  reality  of  the  facts  involved  in  the  comparison. 

The  third  test  is  a  close  comparison  of  these  documents  with 
one  another,  where  they  refer  to  the  same  matters,  to  see  whether 
or  not  their  representations  are  harmonious.  This  comparison 
takes  into  view  not  only  the  explicit  statements  which  the  writ- 
ers make,  but  also  allusions  made  by  one  to  events  described  by 
another.  The  enemies  of  the  book  have  gone  over  this  ground, 
from  side  to  side,  and  end  to  end,  searching  as  with  a  micro- 
scope, for  inconsistencies  ;  and  they  have  paraded  alleged  incon- 
sistencies in  such  numbers  as  to  appall  the  inexperienced  reader 
when  he  first  encounters  them.  So  confident  are  they  in  the  cor- 
rectness of  their  specifications,  that  they  commonly  treat  with 
supreme  contempt  the  man  who  denies  it.  Yet  believing  scholars 
have  followed  them  step  by  step,  and  proved  in  reference  to 
every  specification,  that  it  is  either  a  false  charge,  or  a  charge 
based  on  some  illogical  assumption.  A  contradiction  exists 
only  when  two  statements  are  made  which  cannot  both  be  true. 
If,  on  any  rational  hypothesis  whatever,  both  may  be  true, 
whether  they  can  both  be  proved  to  be  true  or  not,  there  is  no 
proof  of  a  contradiction.  After  making  a  fair  allowance  for 
transcriptional  errors,  no  such  contradiction  has  been  proved 
between  any  two  New  Testament  writers ;  and  if  none  has  yet 
been  proved,  it  is  not  at  all  probable  that  one  will  ever  be. 

Not  content  with  this  merely  negative  result,  believers  have 
also  gone  through  the  New  Testament  books,  both  historical  and 


32  GROUNDS  OX  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

epistolary,  in  search  of  internal  evidences  of  their  truthfulness  ; 
and  they  have  found  a  multitude  of  purely  incidental  agreements 
between  them,  which  can  he  accounted  for  only  on  the  supposi- 
tion that  they  all  wrote  with  the  most  minute  accuracy.  Many 
of  these  coincidences  are  found  in  the  midst  of  apparent  dis- 
crepancies, where  they  lay  hidden  until  the  appearance  of  dis- 
crejiancy  was  dissolved  by  closer  scrutiny,  and  the  unseen  agree- 
ment surprisingly  brought  to  light.  The  result  of  the  whole 
inquiry  is  not  only  the  triumphant  vindication  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment writers  from  the  charge  of  contradiction,  but  the  demon- 
stration of  the  fact  that  they  are  the  most  authentic  writers 
known  to  literature. 

In  regard  to  one  particular  class  of  events,  the  miraculous, 
unbelievers  contest  the  preceding  conclusion  with  the  most  des- 
perate persistency. 

It  is  impossible  for  a  man  to  remain  an  infidel  and  believe 
the  miraculous  events  recorded  in  the  New  Testament ;  conse- 
quently the  acceptance  or  rejection  of  these  is  the  crucial  test  of 
man's  faith  in  Christ.  Every  argument  which  philosophy,  his- 
tory and  science  could  suggest  has  been  brought  to  bear  against 
their  credibility,  but  these  have  all  been  refuted  again  and  again 
by  believers.  We  shall  not  attempt  in  this  essay  to  go  over  the 
ground  of  this  argumentation,  for  the  two  reasons,  that  it  is  too 
voluminous,  and  that  there  is  a  shorter  way.  After  all  that  has 
been  said  on  both  sides,  the  question  turns  finally  on  the  evi- 
dence for  a  single  miracle,  without  which  all  of  the  others 
would  have  occurred  in  vain,  and  which,  if  it  be  established  as 
real,  carries  all  the  others  with  it.  We  mean  the  resurrection 
of  Jesus.  No  man  who  believes  this  event  cares  to  deny  any 
other  material  fact  mentioned  in  the  New  Testament ;  and  if  a 
man  denies  this,  it  is  a  small  matter  if  he  denies  everything 
else. 

The  direct  evidence  for  this  event  is  stronger  than  that  for 
any  other  event  in  ancient  history.    It  consists  primarily  of  the 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  33 

testimony  of  men  and  women  who  had  been  intimate  with  Jesus 
before  his  death,  and  who  saw  him  alive  after  his  crucifixion 
and  burial.  We  receive  the  testimony  of  four  of  these  wit- 
nesses directly  from  their  own  pens ;  that  of  the  Apostles  Mat- 
thew and  John  in  their  Gospels,  and  that  of  John,  Peter  and 
Paul  in  their  Epistles,  and  in  the  Apocalypse.  Paul,  it  is  true, 
was  not  familiar  with  the  person  of  Jesus  before  his  death,  but 
his  testimony  has  peculiar  characteristics  which  render  it  not 
less  reliable  than  that  of  any  other  witness.  The  testimony  of 
the  other  witnesses  also  comes  to  us  through  these  men,  and 
through  the  writings  of  Mark  and  Luke,  who  were  companions 
of  all  the  witnesses,  and  had  every  possible  opportunity  to 
know  what  their  testimony  was.  The  competency  of  these  wit- 
nesses, both  with  respect  to  their  capacity  for  correct  observa- 
tion and  their  opportunities  for  correct  knowledge,  is  so  manifest 
to  every  careful  reader  of  the  accounts,  that  it  is  not  too  much 
to  say  that  no  well  informed  and  candid  reader  doubts  it.  Their 
honesty  in  giving  the  testimony  was  subjected  to  the  severest 
tests,  by  the  losses,  afflictions  and  persecutions  which  befell 
them  on  account  of  it ;  and  each  succeeding  generation  since  their 
own,  on  considering  these  tests,  declares  them  honest  witnesses 
by  so  vast  a  majority,  including  many  infidels,  that  the  few  who 
doubt  it  prove  by  the  doubt  that  their  minds  are  in  an  abnormal 
condition.  The  number  of  the  witnesses  has  also  been  found  to 
be  sufficient,  as  is  proved  by  the  fact,  that  no  believer  thinks  his 
faith  would  be  stronger  if  the  witnesses  were  more  numerous, 
and  that  no  unbeliever  claims,  that  were  the  witnesses  more 
numerous  he  would  believe.  Forasmuch,  then,  as  the  witnesses 
;are  sufficiently  numerous,  are  thoroughly  competent  and  unques- 
;  tionably  honest,  it  is  impossible  to  have  stronger  testimony  ;  and 
therefore  it  is  impossible  to  establish  any  fact  which  depends  on 
human  testimony  more  firmly. 

These  considerations  present  the  force  of  the  evidence  from  a 
positive  point  of  view.    It  is  equally  strong  when  viewed  nega- 
3 


34 


GBOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 


tively,  as  when  we  demand  of  the  unbeliever  to  account  for  the 
disappearance  of  the  dead  body  of  Jesus,  on  any  other  hypo- 
thesis than  that  of  liis  resurrection ;  and  when  we  farther  de- 
mand of  him,  to  account  for  the  unquestioning  belief  of  these 
witnesses,  that  they  saw  him  alive,  conversed  with  him,  and 
handled  his  person,  as  is  recorded.  To  the  former  of  these  de- 
mands, some  of  the  older  infidels  have  responded,  by  denying 
that  he  actually  died  on  the  cross,  and  by  affirming  that  he 
died  naturally  in  the  tomb,  and  disappeared  by  going  elsewhere 
and  remaining  in  retirement  until  he  died  like  other  men.  This 
hj^pothesis  encounters  so  many  objections  which  readily  pre- 
sent themselves  to  those  acquainted  with  the  narratives,  that  it 
has  been  adopted  by  very  few,  and  it  has  been  refuted  by  none 
more  successfully  than  by  later  unbelievers.  With  almost  one 
voice,  recent  infidel  writers  unite  with  believers  in  holding  that 
Jesus  was  certainly  dead  when  he  was  placed  in  the  tomb. 
Most  of  these  have  deliberately  shunned  the  question,  what  be- 
came of  the  body  ?  and  Christian  Baur  goes  so  far  as  to  declare 
that  the  question  is  outside  of  historical  inquiry,*  thus  putting 
outside  of  historical  inquiry  the  most  momentous  event,  if  it  be 
an  event,  of  which  history  sj)eaks — an  event  which,  whether 
real  or  not,  has  afiected  human  history  more  profoundly  than 
any  other  that  ever  transpired  on  the  earth.  To  refuse  inquiry 
into  such  a  fact,  and  this  too,  while  writing  a  history  of  the 
church,  is  to  acknowledge  that  no  account  of  it  could  be  given 
which  would  not  put  to  shame  the  man  who  does  not  believe  it. 
Other  infidels,  notably  Strauss  and  Renan,  have  attempted  to 
account  for  the  disappearance  of  the  body  ;f  but  their  attempts 
are  so  futile  that  Prof.  Huxley  repudiates  them,  and  goes  back 
to  the  old  abandoned  theory  of  a  natural  resuscitation.  This 
he  does  in  his  recent  controversy  with  Dr.  Wace.  The  fact  that 
nothing  better  than  those  vain  and  contradictory  attempts  have 

*  "The  question  as  to  the  nature  and  the  reality  of  the  resurrection  lies  outside  the  sphere  of 
historical  inquiry."  Chuixh  History,  1:  42. 

tNew  Life  of  Jesus.  1:  431, 432;  Apostles,  78-80. 


OROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  35 

been  devised  by  infidels,  a  succession  of  whom  for  fourteen  hun- 
dred years  has  been  tugging  at  tliis  problem,  is  conclusive 
proof,  almost  equal  to  the  direct  testimony  itself,  that  the  only 
way  to  account  for  the  disappearance  of  the  body  is  to  admit 
that  it  was  miraculously  restored  to  life. 

All  parties,  even  those  who  deny  the  actual  death  of  Jesus, 
admit  that  his  disciples  became  convinced  of  his  resurrection, 
and  believed  that  they  saw  him  alive  repeatedly  after  his  cruci- 
fixion. Various  attempts  have  been  made  to  account  for  this 
belief  on  the  supposition  that  it  was  a  delusion ;  but  they  are 
all  so  shallow  and  so  false  to  the  facts  in  the  case  that  any 
tyro  in  discussion  can  answer  them  at  sight — so  shallow  and 
unsatisfying  that  Christian  Baur,  after  considering  them  all, 
and  doubtless  desiring,  if  he  could,  to  accept  some  one  of  them, 
declares  that  no  psychological  analysis  can  account  for  this  be- 
lief.* We  may  say,  then,  'that  it  is  impossible  for  an  infidel  to 
account  for  either  the  belief  of  the  first  Christians,  or  the  dis- 
appearance of  the  dead  body  of  Jesus ;  and  as  it  is  impossible 
to  have  stronger  proof  than  we  have  in  the  way  of  direct  testi- 
mony, the  resurrection  of  Jesus  shall  forever  stand  as  one  of  the 
fixed  events  in  human  history,  to  be  believed  more  and  more 
till  the  end  of  time.  This  fact  being  established,  the  discussion 
about  miracles,  either  those  said  to  have  been  wrought  by  Je- 
sus, or  those  wrought  by  his  Apostles,  is  closed  ;  and  with  this 
question  is  settled  the  question,  whether  the  New  Testament  is 
a  part  of  the  word  of  Gfod,  and  its  teachings  a  divine  rule  of 
faith  ;  for  if  these  men  wrought  miracles  in  attestation  of  the 
truth  of  their  utterances,  the  truth  of  these  utterances  is 
stamped  with  the  seal  of  God. 

The  credibility  of  the  Old  Testament  narratives,  like  the 
genuineness  of  the  Old  Testament  books,  is  a  more  difficult 
question,  because  of  the  greater  difficulty  in  applying  to  these 


*"ThouKh  we  assume  that  an  inward  spiritual  process  was  possible  by  which  the  unbelief  of 
tlie  disciphts  at  tlie  time  of  the  death  of  .Jesus  was  changed  into  belief  in  liis  resurrection,  still  no 
psychological  analysis  can  show  what  that  process  was."  Church  History,  1 :  42. 


36  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

documents  tlie  tests  of  historical  criticism.  We  know  less 
about  the  authors  of  the  books ;  far  less  about  the  tests  of 
honesty  and  competency  to  which  they  were  subjected ;  and 
the  contemporary  documents  which  remain  to  us  are  few  and 
fragmentary.  Still,  we  have  sufficient  ground,  apart  from  the 
inspiration  of  the  writers,  for  believing  that  in  these  books  we 
have  a  record  of  facts. 

The  serious  and  religious  character  of  the  books  indicates 
that  the  authors  were  aiming  to  tell  the  truth ;  and  there  are 
other  internal  evidences  of  honesty  of  purpose.  So  far  as  their 
statements  can  be  tested  by  contemporaneous  documents,  such 
as  Egyptian  and  Assyrian  inscriptions,  their  accuracy  is  con- 
firmed. When  the  same  transactions  are  mentioned  in  differ- 
ent books,  some  discrepancies  are  found  in  figures  and  names  ; 
but  these  are  accounted  for  by  the  known  liability  of  transcrib- 
ers to  make  more  frequent  mistakes  in  such  matters  than  in 
others.  On  the  other  hand,  a  careful  examination  of  parallel 
passages  in  the  different  books  reveals  a  large  number  of 
minute  and  undesigned  coincidences  which  are  accounted  for 
only  by  extreme  accuracy  of  statement.  The  geographical  and 
political  allusions,  too,  in  which  the  books  abound,  are  all  so 
exact  as  to  prove  not  only  accuracy  of  statement,  but  fullness 
of  knowledge. 

But  above  all,  the  credibility  of  the  Old  Testament  narra- 
tions is  proved  by  the  testimony  of  Jesus  Christ  and  the  Apos- 
tles. They  cite  as  real  many  of  the  very  facts  in  the  Old  Tes- 
tament record,  which  are  pronounced  by  unbelievers  the  most 
incredible.  We  may  enumerate  among  these,  the  creation  of 
the  first  human  pair,  and  the  account  of  the  origin  of  woman  ; 
the  temptation  and  the  fall  of  this  pair;  the  destruction  of 
human  and  animal  life  by  the  flood  ;  the  miraculous  destruc- 
tion of  Sodom,  together  with  the  rescue  of  Lot  and  the  fate  of 
his  wife ;  the  call  of  Abraham,  the  promises  made  to  him,  and 
his  trial  by  the  call  to  sacrifice  his  son  ;  the  afflictions  and  the 
restoration  of  Job ;   the  miracles  in  Egypt,  at  the  Red  Sea  and 


O BOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  37 

in  the  wilderness  ;  the  fall  of  Jericho  ;  the  miraculous  preserva- 
tion of  Jonah  in  the  bowels  of  the  fish  ;  the  three  years'  drouth 
in  the  days  of  Elijah,  begun  and  terminated  in  answer  to 
prayer ;  the  healing  of  Naaman  by  Elisha,  and  others.  Now 
the  acceptance  of  these  events  as  real  by  Jesus  and  the  Apos- 
tles, is  sufiicient  ground  for  their  acceptance  by  all  who  believe 
in  Jesus.  But  the  evidence  reaches  farther  than  these  particu- 
lar events  ;  for  unless  there  were  reasons  for  accepting  these 
which  did  not  apply  to  other  Old  Testament  events,  we  must 
conclude  that  the  latter  were  accepted  also,  and  that  Jesus  and 
the  Apostles  held  all  the  Old  Testament  history  to  be  authentic. 
No  such  reasons  have  been  alleged  ;  and  certainly  such  a  dis- 
tinction cannot  be  based  on  the  greater  inherent  credibility  of 
the  events  quoted  and  endorsed  ;  for  with  the  single  exception 
of  the  miracle  of  causing  the  sun  to  stand  still  in  its  course, 
nothing  so  wonderful  as  some  of  these  is  on  record.  Moreover, 
the  manner  in  which  the  Old  Testament  was  constantly  cited 
by  these  authorities  precludes  the  supposition  that  they  had 
in  mind  any  such  distinction.  It  follows  that  Jesus  and  the 
Apostles  endorse  the  Old  Testament  as  real  history.  More  solid 
ground  than  this  for  believing  we  cannot  have,  and  we  do  not 
desire. 

If  the  contents  of  the  Bible  consisted  only  in  facts  which 
passed  under  the  personal  observation  of  the  writers,  evidence 
additional  to  that  already  adduced  would  scarcely  be  called  for. 
But  much  of  the  record  has  respect  to  past  events,  which  could 
not  have  been  witnessed  by  the  writers ;  much  to  matters  in  the 
spiritual  world  which  men  in  the  flesh  could  not  know  by  their 
unaided  powers;  much  to  the  will  and  the  thoughts  of  God, 
alike  inscrutable ;  and  much  to  the  distant  future  which  no 
mortal  vision  can  penetrate.  In  order  that  the  statements  of 
the  writers  on  such  subjects  may  be  taken  into  our  creed,  we 
must  have  satisfactory  evidence  that  they  enjoyed  supernatural 
means  of  obtaining  and  imparting  knowledge.  If  they  did, 
this  not  only  gives  good  ground  for  believing  them  on  these 


38  GliOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

topics,  but  it  also  imparts  a  new  element  of  certainty  to  their 
statements  on  matters  of  ordinary  history.  Thus  we  reach  the 
question  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Bible  writers,  and  we  see  the 
necessity  for  settling  this  question  before  our  survey  of  the 
grounds  of  faith  will  be  complete. 

Of  the  inspiration  of  the  Apostles,  those  who  have  accepted 
the  deduction  already  reached  in  this  essay  need  no  better 
proof  and  can  have  none  better  than  the  statements  of  the 
Apostles  themselves ;  seeing  they  are  proved  to  be  reliable  in 
their  statements  even  in  regard  to  miraculous  events.  Their 
statements  show  that  Christ,  previous  to  his  death,  promised  to 
bestow  upon  the  Twelve  such  an  irapartation  of  the  Holy  Sjjirit, 
that  when  called  on  to  answer  for  themselves  before  earthly 
rulers  they  should  not  be  anxious  as  to  how  or  what  they 
should  speak ;  that  they  should  not  even  premeditate  ;  but  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  would  give  them  in  that  hour  what  they  should 
say  :  "For,"  said  he,  "^it  is  not  you  that  speak,  but  the  Spirit 
of  your  Father  who  speaketh  in  you."  He  told  them  also, 
without  special  reference  to  tlieir  arraignment  before  rulers,  that 
the  Spirit  would  bring  all  things  to  their  remembrance  which 
he  had  spoken  to  them,  and  guide  them  into  all  the  truth.  As 
sure  as  those  promises  were  fulfilled,  when  we  read  what  the 
Apostles  said  and  wrote  after  the  fulfillment,  we  must  receive  it 
as  not  coming  from  them  alone,  but  from  the  Spirit  of  God,  with 
whom  there  can  be  no  falsehood  or  mistake.  To  speak  of  a 
lapse  of  memory  in  the  writing  is  to  deny  the  fulfillment  of  the 
promise. 

That  these  promises  were  fulfilled,  we  are  assured  by  the 
author  of  Acts  of  Apostles,  who  was  a  witness  of  much  that  he 
records,  and  a  reliable  reporter  of  all.  They  began  to  be  ful- 
filled on  the  first  Pentecost  after  the  resurrection,  and  the  pro- 
cess continued  throughout  the  lives  of  the  Apostles,  the  Spirit 
constantly  giving  evidence  of  his  continued  presence  in  them 
by  signs  a  nd  wonders  which  accompanied  their  preaching.  In 
addition  to  the  evidence  of  this  writer,  we  have  that  of  some  of 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  39 

the  Apostles  themselves  in  their  Epistles.  Even  in  the  four 
great  epistles  of  Paul,  which  unbelievers  acknowledge  to  be 
genuine,  and  to  have  been  written  by  an  honest  man,  there  are 
repeated  allusions  to  miracles  which  he  wrought  by  the  Holy 
Spirit,  and  a  most  positive  declaration  that  he  received  directly 
from  the  Spirit,  in  words  taught  by  it,  things  which  he  revealed 
to  his  fellowmen.  These  miracles  were  his  own  acts,  in  regard 
to  the  reality  of  which  he  could  not  be  mistaken,  and  therefore 
he  either  made  false  representations,  which  would  nullify  the 
admission  of  his  honesty,  or  the  miracles  were  real,  and  his 
claim  to  inspiration  as  real  as  the  miracles  which  attested  it. 
The  same  is  true  of  the  other  Apostles.  Believers,  therefore, 
stand  on  the  established  fact,  that  the  writers  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, so  many  as  were  Apostles,  wrote  under  the  guidance  of 
the  Spirit  of  God,  and  that  as  a  consequence  they  wrote  with- 
out error  on  all  the  subjects  within  the  range  of  their  official 
utterances.  As  to  those  writers  who  were  not  apostles,  they  be- 
long to  the  class  to  which  the  Apostles  imparted  a  measure  of 
the  Spirit  which  they  themselves  possessed,  and  we  believe  that 
they  also  were  inspired.  It  is  true  that  Luke,  who  is  one  of 
these,  claims  to  have  acquired  knowledge  of  what  he  writes 
concerning  Jesus  by  careful  inquiry  from  the  eye-witnesses  ;  but 
this,  instead  of  being  a  denial  of  his  own  inspiration,  as  some 
have  affirmed,  only  shows  that  he  employed  the  natural  means 
of  gaining  knowledge.  It  does  not  touch  the  question  as  to  his 
guidance  by  the  Spirit  in  discriminating  between  the  true  and 
the  false,  and  in  writing  with  proper  accuracy  that  which  he 
had  learned. 

The  evidence  of  the  inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament  rests  on 
somewhat  different  ground.  The  prophets  all  assert  in  some 
form  their  own  inspiration,  and  their  assertions  are  abundantly 
supported  by  the  fulfillment  of  their  predictions.  The  histor- 
ical and  poetical  writers,  as  a  rule,  make  no  such  claim,  though 
their  books  contain  many  internal  evidences  of  inspiration, 
which,  in  an  elaborate  discussion  of  the  subject,  it  would  be 


40  GJROUXDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

proper  to  set  forth.  The  most  conclusive  evidence,  however,  in 
reference  to  them  all,  is  found  in  statements  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, and  in  this  essay  we  shall  content  ourselves  with  present- 
ing these : 

a.  Passages  from  nearly  all  the  prophetic  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  are  quoted  in  the  New  as  having  been  fulfilled  by 
events  in  the  career  of  Christ  or  in  that  of  the  Church.  These 
citations  were  made,  not  to  prove  the  inspiration  of  the  proph- 
ets, but,  being  made  to  persons  who  believed  the  prophets,  they 
were  intended  to  show  that  the  events  which  fulfilled  them  were 
brought  about  in  accordance  with  the  predetermined  purpose 
and  foreknowledge  of  God.  But  while  they  were  made  for  this 
purpose,  they  also  prove  the  inspiration  of  the  prophets,  seeing 
that  only  by  direct  insj)iration  could  the  latter  have  revealed 
the  purpose  and  foreknowledge  of  God.  So,  then,  these  citations 
serve  the  double  purpose  of  confirming  the  claims  of  Jesus,  and 
proving  the  inspiration  of  the  prophets.  Some  of  them,  it  is 
true,  are  not  predictions,  but  sayings  of  the  prophets  which 
found  fulfillment  as  proverbs  are  fulfilled ;  but  a  sufficient  num- 
ber of  them  are  actual  predictions  to  answer  the  purpose  of  our 
argument.  The  fulfillments  are  obvious  to  our  own  understand- 
ing, and  the  recognition  of  them  by  Jesus  and  the  Apostles 
assures  us  that  our  understanding  does  not  mislead  us. 

b.  As  to  the  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  they  are  so 
quoted  that  their  inspiration  is  either  expressly  or  indirectly 
affirmed.  Jesus  quotes  from  Genesis  the  concluding  verse  in  the 
account  of  the  creation  of  woman,  as  the  word  of  God  (Matt.  19  ; 
4,  5,)  and  this  it  could  not  have  been  if  the  writer  had  not  been 
divinely  inspired.  He  quotes  from  Exodus  the  fifth  command- 
ment of  the  Decalogue,  as  both  the  word  of  Moses  and  the  com- 
mandment of  God  (Mark  7  :  8-10);  and  it  could  have  been  neither 
had  it  not  been  written  by  Moses  through  revelation  from  God. 
He  quotes  a  passage  from  Deuteronomy  as  the  first  of  all  the 
commandments,  and  one  from  Leviticus  as  the  second  (Mark  12: 
28-31,  cf.  Deut.  6:4;  Lev.  19:8).    He  affirms  that  the  words  in 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  BECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  41 

Exodus,  represented  as  spoken  by  God  to  Moses  at  the  burning 
bush,  were  the  real  words  of  God,  and  the  book  from  which  he 
quotes  them  he  calls  the  book  of  Moses  (Mark  12: 26),  Some  of 
the  Psalms  are  quoted  in  the  same  way.  Jesus  quotes  one 
with  the  formula,  "David  said  in  the  Holy  Spirit"  (Mark  12: 
35),  thus  affirming  both  its  authorship  by  David  and  David's 
inspiration.  Peter  quotes  another  Psalm,  says  that  David 
wrote  it,  calls  David  a  prophet,  and  says  that  he  wrote  the  pas- 
sage concerning  the  resurrection  of  the  Christ  (Acts  2:  24-31); 
while  all  the  Apostles  unitedly  declare  that  God  spoke  through 
the  Holy  Spirit  by  the  mouth  of  his  servant  David,  their  father, 
in  the  second  Psalm  (Acts  4:  24-27). 

c.  Besides  these  citations  from  particular  books  with  the 
assertion  of  their  inspiration,  both  Jesus  and  the  Apostles  make 
general  statements  of  the  same  import  concerning  groups  of 
books,  and  concerning  the  Old  Testament  as  a  whole.  Jesus 
rebuked  his  disciples  for  not  believing  what  the  prophets  had 
written  about  himself,  and,  "beginning  from  Moses  and  all  the 
prophets,  he  interpreted  in  all  the  Scriptures  the  things  concern- 
ing himself"  (Luke  24:  25-27).  He  afterward  said  to  the  Twelve, 
"All  things  must  needs  be  fulfilled  which  are  written  in  the  law 
of  Moses,  and  the  prophets,  and  the  Psalms,  concerning  me" 
(Luke  24:  44).  But  what  things  could  have  been  written  in  any 
of  these  books  concerning  him,  things  which  were  prophetic  and 
must  be  fulfilled,  unless  their  authors  wrote  by  divine  inspira- 
tion ?  Again,  Jesus  rebuked  his  enemies  for  their  unbelief,  and 
said  to  them,  "Think  not  that  I  will  accuse  you  to  the  Father; 
there  is  one  that  will  accuse  you,  even  Moses,  on  whom  ye  have 
set  your  hope.  For  if  ye  believed  Moses  ye  would  have  believed 
me  ;  for  he  wrote  of  me.  But  if  ye  believe  not  his  writings,  how 
shall  ye  believe  my  words  ?"  (John  5:  45-47).  Here  he  not  only 
recognizes  certain  writings  as  the  writings  of  Moses,  the  very 
writings  undoubtedly  which  his  hearers  ascribed  to  Moses  ;  but 
he  asserts  that  Moses  wrote  of  him.  But  Moses  could  not  have 
written  of  him  fifteen  hundred  years  before  he  was  born,  unless 


42  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

lie  wrote  by  inspiration.  Jesus  probably  refers  in  this  citation 
more  particularly  to  the  passage  in  Deuteronomy,  which  the 
Apostle  Peter  also  quotes  and  ascribes  to  Moses  (Acts  3 :  22.  23), 
and  which  inspiration  alone  could  have  enabled  him  to  write. 

Passing  by  other  citations  which  might  be  made,  we  content 
ourselves  with  a  single  one  from  the  Apostle  Paul,  the  well 
known  declaration,  "Every  scripture  inspired  of  God,  is  also 
profitable  for  teaching,  for  reproof,  for  correction,  for  instruction 
in  righteousness,"  etc.  If  this  passage  were  isolated,  it  would 
have  no  special  bearing  on  our  proposition ;  but  it  is  immediately 
preceded  by  the  remark  to  Timothy,  "Prom  a  child  thou  hast 
known  the  sacred  writings,  which  are  able  to  make  thee  wise 
unto  salvation  through  faith  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus"  (2  Tim- 
8  :  15-17).  This  shows  that  the  scriptures  of  Avhich  he  speaks 
are  those  in  which  Timothy  had  been  instructed,  and  these  were 
unquestionably  our  present  Old  Testament  scriptures.  These 
Paul  represents  as  "inspired  of  God ;"  and  that  he  believed 
them  to  be  so  is  obvious  not  only  from  this  passage,  but  from 
the  way  in  which  he  cites  them  throughout  his  writings.  Indeed, 
nothing  is  more  certain  than  that  Paul  and  all  the  Apostles 
regarded  the  Old  Testament  as  a  collection  of  inspired  writings, 
and  this  alone  should  settle  the  question  with  all  who  regard 
the  Apostles  as  inspired  men. 

In  concluding  this  part  of  my  argument,  it  may  not  be  amiss 
to  say,  that  iu  nothing  which  I  have  read  from  the  pens  of  crit- 
ics unfavorable  to  my  conclusions,  have  I  observed  more  soph- 
istical reasoning  than  in  their  treatment  of  passages  in  the 
New  Testament  which  are  relied  on  to  prove  the  inspiration  of 
the  Old.  This  is  notably  the  case  in  the  works  of  some  writers 
who  claim  full  faith  in  the  infallibility  of  Jesus  Christ. 

"We  have  now  stated  the  grounds  on  which  we  receive  the 
Bible  as  the  word  of  God  ;  and  as  we  stand  on  the  pinnacle  of 
our  last  evidence,  the  inspiration  of  its  writers,  and  look  back 
over  the  field  which  we  have  traversed,  every  step  which  we  have 
taken  appears  safer,  and  every  part  of  the  ground  on  which  we 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  43 

liave  stood  appears  firmer.  We  can  now  see,  as  we  could  not  so 
clearly  see  at  first,  why  it  is  that  a  mere  education  in  the  Chris- 
tian faith  fixes  that  faith  so  deeply  in  the  soul  that  it  can  sel- 
dom be  eradicated.  It  is  because  the  sacred  books  were 
intended  by  their  author  to  have  just  such  a  power.  An  emi- 
nent unbeliever  pours  out  the  bitterness  of  a  soul  that  has  lost 
this  faith  in  these  mournful  words  :  "I  would  gladly  give  away 
all  that  I  am,  and  all  I  ever  may  become,  all  the  years,  every 
one  of  them,  which  may  be  given  me  to  live,  for  but  one  week  of 
my  old  child's  faith,  to  go  back  to  calm  and  peace  again,  and 
then  to  die  in  hope.  Oh,  for  one  look  of  the  blue  sky,  as  it 
looked  then  when  we  called  it  heaven."  *  Why  did  it  not 
appear  to  the  unhappy  man  that  a  faith  so  pure  and  heavenly 
must  have  come  from  God  ? 

We  can  now  see  more  clearly  why  a  large  majority  of  the 
more  learned  and  wise  and  good  of  every  land  where  the  Bible 
has  been  known  have  believed  it  to  be  the  word  of  God,  and 
have  so  taught  their  children ;  why  it  is  that  belief  in  the  Bible 
has  made  those  who  have  lived  consistently  with  their  faith  the 
best  and  purest  of  human  kind  ;  why  it  is  that  in  reading  the 
Bible  there  is  constantly  felt  by  the  good  a  sense  of  its  truth- 
fulness ;  why  it  is  that  its  central  figure  is  a  character  which  no 
man  or  set  of  men  could  have  conceived  or  portrayed  without 
help  from  God  ;  and  why  it  is  that  the  Bible,  though  assailed 
by  powerful  foes  in  a  long  succession  of  ages,  and  often  betrayed 
by  those  who  had  been  its  friends,  has  come  down  to  our  age 
with  a  constantly  increasing  multitude  of  the  good  and  the  brave 
who  proclaim  it  the  word  of  God,  and  who  send  it  over  land  and 
sea  to  gladden  the  nations  who  have  been  perishing  without  it. 
We  can  understand  why  a  mysterious  providence,  mysterious  no 
longer,  has  so  wonderfully  preserved  its  text  from  corruption ; 
and  why  it  is  that  links  of  evidence,  which  might  have  been  lost 
but  for  that  same  providence,  have  been  preserved  so  that  we  can 
trace  its  books,  so  far  as  need  be,  to  the  very  men  in  remote  ages 

*  Nemesis  of  Faith.  J.  A.  Froude,  27. 


44  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  BECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

who  wrote  fhem,  and  that  we  can  test  the  truthfulness  of  these 
writers  to  our  deepest  satisfaction.  It  is  all  because  the  Bible 
is  God-inspired. 

IV.    THE  GBOUNDS  OX  WHICH   WE  BECEIVE   THE  BIBLE  AS  THE 
ONLY  BULE  OF  FAITH  AND  FBACTICE. 

We  now  pass  to  the  last  division  of  our  subject,  the  grounds 
on  which  we  regard  the  Bible  as  the  only  rightful  rule  to  direct 
the  faith,  and  to  control  the  conduct  of  men  ;  in  other  words, 
the  grounds  on  which  we  hold  it  to  be  tlie  only  rightful  creed 
and  book  of  discipline  for  the  church.  We  receive  it  thus,  be- 
cause it  was  given  to  us  by  God  for  this  very  purpose.  The 
fact  that  it  is  from  God  makes  it  our  duty  to  believe  it,  even 
though  nothing  were  said  of  this  duty  in  the  book  itself;  and 
the  same  fact  makes  it  our  duty  to  observe  all  the  precepts  in  it 
which  are  addressed  to  us.  But  we  are  not  left  to  inferences, 
however  necessary,  for  a  knowledge  of  this  duty ;  it  is  set  forth 
clearly  in  the  book  itself.  At  the  close  of  the  opening  sermon 
of  Jesus  concerning  his  kingdom,  it  is  declared  that  men  stand 
or  fall  before  God,  as  they  hear  and  do,  or  hear  and  do  not  the 
sayings  of  Jesus.  He  declared  to  his  apostles  when  sending 
them  forth,  "He  that  receiveth  you  receiveth  me,  and  he  that 
receiveth  me  receiveth  him  that  sent  me."  He  also  assured 
them  that  during  the  regeneration,  while  he  should  be  sitting 
on  his  throne,  they  should  sit  on  twelve  thrones  judging  the 
twelve  tribes  of  Israel ;  and  consequently,  we  find  them,  from 
Pentecost  onward,  speaking  as  ambassadors  of  Christ,  and  re- 
quiring obedience  from  all  the  disciples.  Among  the  last  words 
of  the  chief  man  of  the  Twelve  are  these:  "  This  is  now,  be- 
loved, the  second  epistle  that  I  write  to  you,  and  in  both  of 
them  I  stir  up  your  sincere  mind  by  putting  you  in  remem- 
brance that  you  should  remember  the  words  that  were  spoken 
before  by  the  holy  prophets,  and  the  commandment  of  the  Lord 
and  Savior  through  your  apostles."  But  why  argue  a  proposi- 
tion which  is  not  disputed  ?    All  who  receive  the  Bible  as  the 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  45 

word  of  God  agree  that  it  is  a  divinely  appointed  rule  of  faith 
and  conduct.  They  agree  that  if  a  man  denies  any  part  of  the 
Bible,  interpolated  passages  excepted,  he  is  to  that  extent  un- 
sound in  the  faith  ;  if  he  refuses  to  obey  any  precept  among 
those  now  binding,  he  is  to  that  extent  sinful ;  and  that  in  both 
cases  he  is  to  be  dealt  with  accordingly  by  the  church  and  by 
individual  disciples.  Believers  differ  only  as  to  the  parts  of  the 
Scripture  which  should  govern  us  now,  and  as  to  their  exclu- 
siveness  as  a  rule  of  discipline. 

Because  the  Old  Testament  was  the  God-given  law  of  the 
old  dispensation,  and  is  still  binding  on  the  faith  of  Christians, 
many  have  concluded  that  it  is  still  binding  as  our  rule  of  con- 
duct; but  the  New  Testament  makes  it  clear  that  this  conclu- 
sion is  erroneous.  The  voice  of  God  in  the  scene  of  the  trans- 
figuration, proclaiming,  in  the  presence  of  Moses  the  lawgiver 
and  of  Elijah  the  prophet,  "This  is  my  beloved  Son;  hear  ye 
him,"  made  Jesus  not  only  the  supreme,  but  the  only  lawgiver 
in  the  new  dispensation.  In  compliance  with  this  proclama- 
tion, we  are  taught  by  the  Apostle  Paul  that  while  the  law  was 
our  tutor  to  bring  us  to  Christ,  now  that  faith  is  come  we  are  no 
longer  under  the  tutor ;  that  Christ  has  abolished,  in  his  flesh, 
the  law  of  commandments  contained  in  ordinances  ;  that  the 
first  covenant,  having  been  found  defective,  has  vanished  away 
and  given  place  to  the  second.  In  this  change  from  the  old  to 
the  new,  much  of  the  old  has  been  re-enacted,  including  all  that 
was  originally  intended  to  be  perpetual  and  universal.  This 
part  is  binding  now,  not  because  it  was  in  the  old,  but  because 
it  is  re-enacted  in  the  new.  The  New  Testament  is,  then,  the 
divine  rule  of  discipline  under  Christ ;  and  our  final  question 
is,  whether  it  is  the  only  rule,  whether  it  excludes  all  rules 
devised  by  the  wisdom  of  men. 

All  Protestants  agree  that  it  is  the  only  infallible  rule,  but 
many  hold  that  we  are  at  liberty  to  frame  creeds  and  rules  of 
discipline  based  on  our  own  fallible  judgment.  This  question 
has  been  decided  for  us  by  Jesus  in  deciding  for  the  Jews  one 


46  GIWCXDS  OX  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  THE  BIBLE. 

which  involved  the  same  principle.  Their  wise  men,  in  the 
course  of  ages,  had  concluded  that  in  addition  to  the  law  which 
God  had  given  them,  some  other  rules  were  important,  if  not 
indispensable ;  and  they  adopted  such  rules,  one  by  one,  until 
they  accumulated  a  large  body  of  them,  which  they  styled  the 
tradition  of  the  elders.  These  they  enforced  on  the  consciences 
of  the  people,  and  Jesus  was  himself  adjudged  a  sinner  wIkmi 
he  neglected  to  observe  them.  He  dealt  with  these  rules  in  a 
most  summary  manner.  He  first  pointed  out  the  fact  that  at 
least  one  of  them  made  void  a  commandment  of  God ;  and, 
adopting  the  language  of  one  of  their  prophets,  he  indignantly 
repudiated  the  whole  body  of  their  tradition,  and  laid  down  a 
law  to  govern  all  such  matters,  in  these  words :  "In  vain  do 
they  worship  me,  teaching  as  their  doctrines  the  precepts  of 
men."  This  rule  perem^jtorily  excludes  from  the  realm  of 
observance  and  faith  in  the  church  of  God  every  precept  of 
men  ;  and  it  limits  our  worship  and  our  teaching  to  that  which 
God  has  appointed  and  taught.  We  are  to  stand  fast  in  this 
freedom  with  which  Christ  has  made  us  free,  and  not  be  en- 
tangled in  any  yoke  of  bondage  under  the  rules  and  precepts 
of  men.  We  are  to  repel  as  a  usurpation  any  attempt,  from 
whatever  source,  to  bind  on  us  any  rule  which  our  Lord  has  not 
given. 

With  this  rule  of  our  King  agree  all  the  deductions  of 
human  reason  and  experience.  If  we  have  an  infallible  rule 
which  cannot  mislead  us,  it  is  but  a  dictate  of  common  sense  to 
say  that  we  have  no  use  for  a  fallible  rule  on  the  same 
subject.  Why  should  a  merchant  have  two  yard  sticks,  one  of 
the  standard  length,  and  one  a  little  longer  or  shorter  ?  What 
honest  man  keeps  two  pairs  of  balances,  one  which  he  knows 
to  be  correct,  and  one  which  may  weigh  heavier  or  lighter  ? 
Why,  then,  should  men  who  wish  to  please  God,  both  in 
what  they  do  themselves  and  in  what  they  enforce  on  their 
brethren,  make  a  fallible  rule  in  addition  to  the  infallible  one 
which  God  has  given  ? 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  EECEIVE  THE  BIBLE.  47 

Is  it  said  that  we  need  fallible  rules  to  aid  us  in  explaining 
and  enforcing  the  one  that  is  infallible?  We  answer  that  it 
argues  a  want  of  faith  in  God  to  assume  that  the  rule  which  he 
in  his  infinite  wisdom  has  given  demands  any  such  help  at  our 
hands.  It  is  certainly  as  easy  to  enforce  a  rule  given  by  God 
as  one  given  by  men  ;  and  in  enforcing  the  former,  we  have  the 
consolation  of  knowing  that  we  are  enforcing  that  about  the 
lawfulness  of  which  there  can  be  no  doubt.  We  cannot  be  mis- 
led if  we  follow  this  rule,  or  do  injustice  if  we  enforce  it.  If  it 
fail  to  accomplish  some  results  which  appear  to  us  desirable, 
we  shall  not  be  blamed  for  the  consequences ;  the  Lawgiver 
takes  these  on  himself.  Certainly  He  will  not  be  displeased 
with  us  if  we  follow  as  best  we  can  the  rule  which  he  has  given, 
and  if  at  the  same  time  we  show  our  faith  in  his  wisdom  by 
refusing  to  follow  any  other. 

Finally,  that  unity  which  Christ  requires  his  church  to  main- 
tain, and  for  which  he  offered  a  most  earnest  and  touching 
prayer^  that  unity  which  is  now  so  sadly  broken,  can  never  be 
re-established  on  the  basis  of  any  human  creed  or  book  of  dis- 
cipline. The  past  experience  of  Christendom,  if  it  has  demon- 
strated anything,  has  clearly  demonstrated  this.  The  "Apostles' 
Creed,"  the  shortest  one  ever  drafted,  proved  insuflicient  for  this 
purpose,  and  it  was  succeeded  by  others  more  elaborate.  Every 
one  of  these  has  proved  insufficient  to  maintain  unity  among 
even  its  own  adherents,  as  appears  from  the  fact  that  every  sect 
in  Christendom  is  more  or  less  agitated  by  teachings  that  are 
heretical  according  to  its  own  standards,  and  by  acrimonious 
disputes  as  to  the  meaning  of  these  standards  on  important 
points  of  doctrine  and  discipline.  Dissatisfaction  is  everywhere 
springing  up  and  avowing  itself,  and  many  of  the  earnest  men 
in  the  creed-boand  sects  are  urging  a  return  to  the  "Apostles' 
Creed,"  forgetting,  apparently,  that  it  was  tested  long  ago  and 
proved  a  broken  reed  to  those  who  leaned  upon  it.  Surely  this 
bitter  experience  of  fifteen  centuries  ought  to  have  taught  us  all 
that  the  only  way  out  of  present  strife  and  into  the  unity  which 


48  GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  RECEIVE  TEE  BIBLE. 

Christ  demands  and  for  which  our  own  hearts  cry  out,  is  to 
return  to  the  creed  and  book  of  discipline  which  Christ  gave, 
and  which  the  church  maintained  before  its  unity  was  broken. 
This  is  the  only  rule  which  all  believers  alike  acknowledge,  and 
it  certainly  furnishes  the  only  basis  of  union  which  is  within  our 
reach,  as  it  is  the  only  one  which  the  Lord  of  the  church  has 
authorized.  We  should  return  to  it,  not  with  the  expectation 
that  even  by  the  common  adoption  and  enforcement  of  it  all 
heresy  or  schism  will  or  can  be  avoided ;  for  those  could  not  be 
prevented  even  when  this  divine  rule  was  being  enforced  by 
inspired  apostles ;  they  are  the  unavoidable  results  of  human 
dejDravity,  and  they  will  never  cease  to  trouble  us  till  all  men 
shall  become  subject  to  the  law  of  the  Spirit  of  Christ ;  but  if  we 
seek  to  prevent  them  by  the  enforcement,  to  the  best  of  our  abil- 
ity, of  the  rule  of  life  which  God  has  given,  and  lean  not  to  our 
own  understanding,  we  shall  have  done  our  duty,  and  when  the 
conflict  is  over  the  Captain  of  our  salvation  will  say  to  us, 
"Well  done." 

Our  final  conclusion  is,  that  the  Bible  is  the  only  rule  of  faith 
and  practice  which  can  be  rightly  accepted  by  Christians,  and 
that  it  is  so  because  it  is  the  word  of  God,  and  because  it  was 
given  by  God  to  serve  this  purpose. 


George  W.  Longan  was  born  in  the  now  defunct  town  of  Chariton,  in 
Chariton  county,  Mo.,  on  the  31st  day  of  December,  IMIO,  His  parents  were 
Augustin  K.  and  jNIartha  B.  Longan.  His  paternal  grandfather  was  Patrick 
Liongan,  a  name  wliich  sutliciently  indicates  his  nationality,  though  he  was 
born  in  this  country.  "I  suppose,"  writes  the  subject  of  this  sketch  in  a 
note  to  the  editor,  "  there  has  not  been  one  of  his  descendants  that  has  not 
often  sent  loving  thoughts  toward  the  land  of  his  ancestors." 

Bro.  Longan  was  married  in  his  21st  year  to  Myra  Panesa  Reavis, 
daughter  of  James  A.  and  Mary  B.  lleavis,  of  Cooper  county,  Mo.  His  wife, 
like  himself,  is  a  native  of  Missoiu'i.  Concerning  their  married  life,  he 
writes:  "  We  have  seen  many  vicissitudes  in  our  titty  years  of  married  life, 
but  the  Lord  has  been  good  to  us,  and  we  are  still  trusting  liim.  A\'e  have 
reared  seven  children  (four  sons  and  three  daughters),  all  now  married  and 
l^rolessing  Cliristians.  A\^e  lost  two  children  long  ago,  one  three  years  old, 
and  the  other  a  nursing  babe.  They  sleep  sweetly,  till  Christ  sliall  come,  in 
the  cemetery  at  Warsaw,  on  the  bank  of  tlie  beautiful  Osage,  wliich,  through 
all  these  years,  has  sung  their  lullaby  in  nature's  loving  strains.  The  Eter- 
nal will  not  forget  their  resting  place." 

His  early  ministry,  and  the  struggles  incident  thereto,  at  that  day,  may 
best  be  described  in  his  own  Avords:  "  I  confessed  Christ,  and  was  baptized 
by  Allen  Wright,  of  blessed  memory,  in  June,  1844.  I  suppose  I  may  say 
that  I  began  to  preach  about  two  years  later,  though  the  transition  from  the 
leadership  of  our  Lord's  day  social  meetings  to  the  preaching  of  sermons  was 
so  gradual  that  it  would  be  diliicidt  to  lix  a  precise  date.  I  had  to  pass 
through  many  difficulties,  difficulties  such  as  young  preachers  to-day  know 
little  about.  I  do  not  complain  at  all.  The  soul-discipline  was  healthful, 
and  for  it  I  desire  to  be  sincerely  thankful.  The  dear  Lord  has  gently  and 
graciously  led  me,  and  will  lead  n)e  still.  jNIy  parents  were  Baptists,  thor- 
ough Baptists,  but  large-hearted  and  tolerant.  I  stood  alone  among  my 
kindred  the  day  on  which  I  confessed  Christ  in  the  primitive  way.  My 
wife's  people,  too,  were  Baptists.  She  was  herself  a  member  of  the  Baptist 
Church.  Early  in  lite,  however,  she  entered  tlie  Christian  Church  Avith  me, 
and  Ave  have  fought  the  battle  together  till  the  triumph  of  our  special  plea  is 
virtually  assured." 

Few  men  among  vis  of  equal  ability,  and  so  widely  known,  have  confined 
tlieir  labors  to  so  limited  a  range  of  territory.  His  field  of  labor  has  been 
for  the  most  part  in  South  Central  ]\Iissouri,  Avhere  he  has  seen  our  brother- 
hood groAV  from  a  handful  to  a  great  nudtitude.  He  spent  nine  years  in 
Northwest  Missouri,  serving  as  pastor  at  Liberty  and  Plattsburg.  Kever  has 
he  held  a  pastorate  outside  his  native  State.  Except  lor  liis  contributions 
to  our  periodical  literature,  chietly  to  the  CItrislian  and  the  Cliri.sliun- 
EmiKjeJUt^  he  Avould  scarcely  be  knoAvn  outside  the  Missouri  brotherhood, 
in  Avhose  councils  he  has  been  a  prominent  figure  for  many  years.  His  arti- 
cles, hoAvever,  have  given  him  a  Avide  reputation  as  a  profound  and  aggres- 
sive thinker  and  a  scholarly  Avriter.  His  Avork,  "Origin  of  the  ] )iscipk's  of 
Christ,"  Avritten  in  reply  to  Prof.  Whitsitt,  of  the  Louisville  Baptist  Theo- 
logical Seminary,  but  containing  an  independent  di.-rnssion  of  some  of  the 
underlying  principles  of  our  movement,  is  regarded  by  many  as  one  of  the 
ablest  statements  of  our  position  in  our  literature.  Px  sidcs  this,  and  num- 
erous quarterly  articles,  he  has  a  sermon  in  "  Tlie  Living  I'ulpit,"  and  sev- 
eral able  lectures  in  tlie  volumes  of  the  jNIissouri  Christian  Lectureship, 
Avith  otiiers  equally  valuable  awaiting  publication. 


G.  W.  LOXGAX. 


GROUNDS  ON   WHICH   WE   ACCEPT  JESUS  AS  THE 
MESSIAH,  THE  SON  OF  GOD  AND  SAVIOR 
OF  THE  WORLD. 


G.  W.  LONGAN. 

IN  this  paper  I  have  no  space  for  introduction.  I  assume  the 
entire  trustworthiness  as  to  essential  substance,  not  the  fault- 
less accuracy  in  detail,  of  the  documentary  sources  of  our  relig- 
ion. Criticism  has  indeed  made  necessary  certain  modilications 
of  the  traditional  apologists,  but  our  sources  of  knowledge,  both 
of  Jesus  and  the  gospel  of  redemption,  have  passed  the  ordeal  of 
criticism,  and,  as  regards  substance,  are  more  than  ever  assured. 
Something  of  Protestant  scholasticism  is  doubtless  bound  to  go, 
but  the  firm  foundation  of  God  still  stands.  I  speak  not  here 
for  myself  alone.  The  New  Testament  has  a  human  side,  no 
less  than  a  divine.  In  saying  this,  and  in  the  precise  meaning 
I  give  to  the  words,  I  am  happy  in  having  the  concurrence  of 
many  of  the  ablest  scholars  and  most  loyal  Christians  now  liv- 
ing. The  Gospels  may  not  be  without  mistake  in  unimportant 
detail,  but  in  essential  facts  they  are  unassailable.  They  reflect 
with  substantial  accuracy  the  realities  of  the  Master's  earthly 
life.  They  are  the  reports  of  eye-witnesses,  or  of  those  who  received 
from  such  witnesses,  in  altogether  reliable  ways,  the  information 
which  is  in  them  transmitted  to  us.  "Where  they  do  not  give  us 
the  direct  testimony  of  those  who  kept  company  with  Jesus,  they 
still  faithfully  represent  that  testimony  as  apprehended  by  the 
church  of  the  first  Christian  century.  Of  this  there  can  be  no  rea- 
sonable doubt.  Of  the  Acts  and  the  Pauline  Epistles  the  same 
authenticity  may  be  confidently  predicated.  In  the  light  of 
all  criticism,  I  judge  it  perfectly  safe  to  take  this  position. 
Further  than  this  my  argument  does  not  require  me  to  go.    I  will 

4  (49) 


60 


GBOUNDS  ON  IVJIICII  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


not  embarrass  my  p'ea  ^v\th.  exploded  theories  of  sacred  writ? 
or  weaken  it  with  Uiuid  and  unwise  concessions.  If  a  defender 
of  the  faith  still  feels  bound  to  maintain  the  mistakes  of  the 
past,  he  has  lived  in  the  nineteenth  century  to  little  purpose. 
The  ship  of  Zion  will  sail  more  smoothly  when  the  lumber  of 
darker  ages  shall  have  been  thrown  overboard,  and  swallowed 
up  by  the  sea.  I  simply  assume,  then,  the  historical  trustworth- 
iness, as  to  essential  substance,  of  the  documentary  sources  of 
the  Christian  faith.  This  testimony  will  stand.  To  assume 
more  than  this,  as  I  suppose,  is  foolish ;  to  affirm  less  than  this 
would  be  treason.  Upon  the  basis  of  this  testimony,  thus  defined, 
we  must  pass  upon  the  claim  of  the  Master  to  be  the  Son  of  God. 
What  then  is  so  witnessed  concerning  him  ?  "What  of  his  deeds? 
What  of  his  words  ?  We  seek  to  get  his  wonderful  personality 
fairly  and  fully  before  us.    What  is  the  testimony  ? 

(1)  Jesus  speaks  loitTi  autliority.  On  opening  the  Gospels, 
the  first  thing  Avhich  impresses  a  thoughtful  man  is  the  dignity 
and  simplicity  with  which  Jesus  speaks.  No  one,  I  am  per- 
suaded, can  seriously  read  the  so-called  Sermon  on  the  Mount 
without  receiving  this  impression.  We  do  not  wonder  at  all 
that  the  listening  multitudes  were  astonished,  and  that  they  said 
he  "taught  them  as  one  having  authority,  and  not  as  the  scribes." 
There  is  more  in  this,  I  am  persuaded,  than  appears  on  the  sur- 
face. These  scribes  were  the  educated  men  of  their  day.  They 
stood,  as  they  supposed,  for  the  orthodoxy  of  the  fathers,  and 
woe  to  the  teacher  of  novel  or  unpatented  doctrine  that  dared  to 
risk  a  collision  with  them.  They  were  thoroughly  acquainted 
with  Halicha  and  Haggada — the  glosses  of  the  law  and  the  his- 
torical traditions  which  had  been  received  from  the  elders  of 
many  generations.  The  law,  and  what  the  famous  Rabbis  had 
said  in  expounding  it,  and  "hedging"  it  in  against  the  ignorant 
commonalty,  furnished  their  subjects  of  discourse.  It  was  a 
great  change  when  Jesus  opened  his  mouth  to  utter  the  deep, 
stirring  words  which  came  direct  from  his  own  loving  heart,  and 
found  instant  contact  with  all  that  was  best  and  divinest  in  the 


GSOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


61 


thoughts  and  spiritual  experiences  of  his  more  serious  listeners. 
This  difference  was  itself  the  sufficient  token  of  a  new  and  better 
dispensation.  It  not  onl}^  contrasted  sharply  with  the  teachings 
of  the  scribes,  it  struck  a  new  note  from  that  even  of  the  inspired 
prophets  of  Israel's  palmy  days.  The  prophets  said  they  had 
received  the  word  of  Jahve,  that  the  word  of  Jahve  "came  to 
them,"  but  Jesus  taught  in  his  own  right,  and  stopped  not  for  a 
moment  to  claim  other  warrant  for  speech  than  that  of  his  own 
perfect  knowledge  of  the  truth  suited  to  the  hour.  He  spake,  as 
the  multitude  rightly  said,  "as  one  having  authority."  "You 
have  heard  that  it  was  said  by  them  of  old  times — but  I  say 
unto  you,"  was  the  formula  which  introduced  his  most  startling- 
innovations.  Sometimes  his  ringing  deliverances  had  respect  to 
traditionary  exposition  of  the  law,  but  at  other  times  he  struck 
boldly  at  the  sacred  code  itself,  Moses,  he  once  said,  permitted 
this  on  account  of  "the  hardness  of  your  hearts,"  but  he  added 
immediately,  "It  was  not  so  from  the  beginning."  It  was  never 
right.  There  was  no  prescription,  however  ancient,  no  statutory 
provision  by  whomsoever  enacted,  which  fettered  him  for  a 
moment  when  eternal  issues  were  at  stake.  On  the  most  import- 
ant of  all  human  questions,  the  great  questions  of  life  and  duty, 
he  never  blundered.  He  never  failed  to  know  the  truth.  AVhence 
this  perfect  knowledge  of  moral  truth,  which  men  admit  even 
to-day?  Whence  the  immaculate  personal  righteousness  to 
which  he  alone,  among  all  the  sons  of  men,  could  ever  lay 
even  the  shadow  of  a  claim  ?  His  miracles  had  their  meanina; 
and  value,  but  this  absolute  knowledge  of  moral  truth,  this  sin- 
less maintenance  of  an  untarnished  soul  in  the  presence  of  the 
Eternal,  is  more  than  any  marvel  ever  Avrought  in  the  annals  of 
all  the  centuries.  Blessed  Jesus,  thou  only  Son  of  the  living 
Grod,  receive  the  grateful  homage  of  this  trusting  heart. 

But  Jesus  was  more  than  simply  a  teacher  of  morals  with- 
out a  peer  in  the  world's  history.  As  a  teacher,  he  never 
tripped  anywhere.  Take,  for  instance,  his  perfect  comprehen- 
sion of  the  whole  nature  and  genius  of  the  kingdom  of  heaven, 


52 


GBOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


which  it  was  his  mission  to  establish  among  men.  From  the 
first,  this  great  conception  was  distinctly  outlined  before  his 
spiritual  vision.  Of  this  his  inimitable  similitudes  furnish 
most  convincing  "proof.  Not  a  single  angle  of  observation 
seems  to  have  been  neglected.  The  kingdom  is  pictured  from 
every  possible  standpoint,  and  the  picture  is  never  false  to  the 
reality,  as  men  begin  to  see  it  now,  in  the  light  of  the  gath- 
ered experiences  of  more  than  half  a  hundred  generations. 
"  The  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  yeast  hidden  in  meal."  How 
silently,  but  certainly,  divine  truth  received  into  the  human 
heart  diffuses  its  gracious  iuliuences  over  wider  and  yet  wider 
areas,  until  the  whole  inner  man  is  brought  under  its  transform- 
ing power.  And  as  it  is  with  the  individual,  so  is  it  also  with 
the  great  mass  of  humanity  in  the  world  !  The  same  law 
holds.  The  leaven  deposited  by  Jesus  in  the  hearts  of  a  few 
disciples  in  Judea  and  Galilee  so  long  ago  has  gone  on  spread- 
ing its  influence  in  larger  and  still  larger  circles,  until  the 
whole  human  mass  shall  soon,  with  God's  help,  be  penetrated 
and  permeated,  through  and  through,  with  the  transfiguring 
and  redeeming  potencies  of  the  gospel.  Can  you  not  see  that 
Jesus  was  looking  through  the  far  away  vistas  of  the  future, 
when  he  drew  this  picture  of  the  ever-increasing  glory  of  his 
kingdom  ?  He  stood  at  the  beginning,  and  saw  plainly  what  we 
see  only  after  the  lapse  of  nearly  two  thousand  years. 

And  that  parable  of  the  "  sower  that  went  forth  to  sow !" 
What  consummate  acquaintance  with  the  human  heart !  How 
absolute  the  knowledge  it  reveals  of  the  fortunes  of  the  gospel 
in  all  the  ages  to  come  !  Kemember  that  this  was  the  begin- 
ning. The  Great  Commissioa  was  not  yet  given.  The  disci- 
ples had  had  no  experience  in  dealing  with  the  whims  and  con- 
tradictions of  men  in  the  matter  of  preaching  the  word.  No 
wonder  they  did  not  understand,  and  appealed  to  the  Master 
for  an  explanation.  He  saw  the  whole  outline  then,  far  more 
clearly  than  we  see  it  even  now.  It  is  impossible  to  avoid  this 
conclusion,  if  we  do  justice  to  the  narrative. 


GEOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


53 


"And  he  said,  The  kingdom  of  God  is  as  if  a  man  should 
cast  seed  upon  the  earth  ;  and  should  sleep  and  rise  night  and 
day,  and  the  seed  should  spring  up  and  grow,  he  knoweth  not 
how — first  the  blade,  then  the  ear,  then  the  full  corn  in  the 
ear!"  How  wonderful  this  prevision  of  the  ever  widening  and 
deepening  transformation  of  that  kingdom  which  is  "  not  of 
this  world,"  but  the  breath  of  whose  life  is  from  the  Spirit  of 
God !  Again  :  "  A  certain  man  sowed  wheat  in  his  field,  and 
while  he  slept  an  enemy  came  and  sowed  tares  among  the 
wheat  and  went  away.  The  servants,  by  and  by,  discover 
what  has  been  done,  and  they  said  to  the  owner  of  the  field, 
shall  we  go  and  gather  out  the  worthless  tares  which  can 
only  choke  and  damage  the  wheat  ?  He  saith.  Nay ;  lest  haply 
while  ye  gather  up  the  tares,  you  root  up  the  wheat  with  them  ; 
let  both  grow  together  till  the  harvest,  and  then  shall  the  work 
of  separating  be  more  easily  accomplished."  Here  is  a  princi- 
ple never  to  be  lost  sight  of  in  the  discipline  of  the  kingdom. 
We  must  not  encourage  the  growth  of  noxious  plants;  we  must 
on  the  contrary  seek  to  get  rid  of  them  by  all  safe  means. 
We  must  distinguish  constantly  in  teaching,  in  admonition  and 
reproof,  between  what  is  pleasing  to  God,  and  what  is  not ;  we 
must  even  declare  our  want  of  fellowship  with  evil-doers,  when 
the  safety  of  the  kingdom  demands  it,  but  we  must  avoid,  as 
far  as  possible,  the  danger  of  destroying  the  wheat,  when  we 
are  trying  to  root  up  the  tares.  I  judge  it  is  often  better  to  let 
both  grow  together,  than  to  try  in  our  blundering  way  to  do  the 
Master's  work  for  him.  But  Jesus  saw  everything  from  the 
beginning.  This  is  the  point  I  press  in  this  argument.  To  him 
all  this  was  knowledge  before  the  event.  To  us,  it  is  the  slow 
and  ever  imperfect  acquisition  of  experience.  How  shall  we 
account  for  this  great  difference  ?  Was  Jesus  only  a  wiser  man 
than  the  rest  of  us  ?  Only  the  wisest  of  his  race  ?  How  came 
he  to  be  that  ?  we  may  well  ask.  In  any  event,  the  fact  of  a 
knowledge  surpassing  the  human  standard  as  we  know  it  in  the 
history  of  the  world's  loftiest  and  noblest  examples,  must  not 


54 


GBOUXDS  OX  WHICH  we  accept  JESUS. 


"be  denied  to  liim.  I  grant  that  there  are  limitations.  This 
affects  not  the  question  before  us,  for  these  limitations  are  the 
necessary  law  of  the  incarnation.  There  are  human  limita- 
tions, let  us  cheerfully  grant,  for  it  is  right  always  to  grant 
truth.  But  there  was  divine  transcendence  of  human  limita- 
tions, no  less.  We  must  see  both  sides  of  this  wonderful  X3er- 
sonage,  if  we  would  know  the  truth  regarding  him. 

(2)  77ie  syuumtJiies  of  Jesus.  AYliat  measureless  sympathy 
with  the  sorrows,  the  weaknesses  and  the  sinfulness  of  men  do 
we  see  in  Jesus  !  It  is  the  last  week  in  Jerusalem,  and  he  has 
been  busy,  all  day  long,  teaching  in  the  temple,  and  Avherever 
anxious  hearts  were  ready  to  listen.  The  day  is  declining  row, 
and,  with  his  disciples,  he  seeks  the  quiet  restfulness  of  beloved 
Olivet.  In  his  zeal  of  warning  and  admonition,  he  has  just 
nttered  startling  words  of  prophecy  regarding  the  Holy  City 
and  the  beautiful  temple,  from  whose  hallowed  courts  he  was 
withdi'awing  forever,  and  now,  his  great  heart  no  longer  able  to 
restrain  its  might}''  yearnings,  he  looked  out  upon  the  scene 
before  him,  and  nttered  in  words  that  cannot  be  read,  even 
to-day,  with  tearless  eyes,  that  Avail,  deeper  than  the  dirge  of  a 
weeping  Jeremiah,  over  the  fated  city  and  people  of  Jahve's 
ancient  covenants  :  "  0  Jerusalem,  Jerusalem,  how  often  would 
I  have  gathered  thy  children  together,  even  as  a  hen  gathereth 
her  chickens  under  her  wings,  and  ye  would  not.  Behold,  your 
house  is  left  nnto  you  desolate.  For  I  say  unto  3"ou  that  you 
shall  not  see  me  henceforth,  until  ye  shall  say.  Blessed  is  he 
that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord !"  What  do  these  deep, 
impassioned  utterances  mean  ?  Evidently,  they  are  the  exj)res- 
sion  of  an  interest  mightier  than  a  mere  human  heart  could  feel 
and  they  are  grounded  in  a  knowledge  vastly  more  than 
human.  There  is  the  question  of  spiritual  salvation,  the  salva- 
tion of  individuals  from  sin,  no  doubt,  but  there  is  something  more 
than  that,  or  the  Master's  words  mislead  me.  The  city  might 
have  been  saved.  The  beautiful  temjjle  might  have  escaped 
the  doom  of  destruction  so  unwillingly  pronounced.    Why  not 


GROUNDS  ON  WIIICJI  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


55 


SO  understand  liini  ?  What  hinders  the  belief  that,  but  for  the 
rejection  of  Jesus,  this  final  woe  might  not  have  come  ?  It  was 
not  necessary  to  the  fulhllment  of  God's  covenant  with  Israel 
that  the  national  autonomy  should  be  restored.  A  spiritual 
Israel,  devoted  to  the  righteousness  of  a  Messianic  spiritual 
reign,  would  not  have  invited  the  legions  of  Rome.  Such  a 
kingdom  would  have  offered  no  suspicion  of  treason  against 
Ca3sar,  and  could  not  have  provoked  imperial  wrath  and  hate. 
Be  that  as  it  may,  I  am  persuaded  that  it  is  only  in  the  admis- 
sion of  our  Lord's  knowledge  of  some  mysterious  complexity 
in  the  issues,  that  we  can  see  clearly  the  explanation  of  the 
whole  historic  event.  But  in  any  case,  we  have  hei'e  more  than 
human  knowledge,  and  an  interest  deeper  and  mightier  than 
mere  human  interest,  because  it  reposes  on  the  foundation  of 
this  larger  knowledge,  and  because  it  springs  from  the  fathom- 
less spiritual  sympathy  of  a  nature  which  is  more  than  human. 
The  fit  expression  of  genuine  human  sympathy  is  always 
touching,  but  this  wail  of  God's  own  Son  over  fated  Jerusalem 
is  the  sublimest  accent  of  pathetic  appeal  that  has  ever  been 
uttered  in  human  speech.  You  can  only  realize  fully  the  mean- 
ing of  this  passionate  cry,  when  yonr  plummet  shall  have 
sounded  the  mighty  depths  of  the  emotional  nature  of  him 
whom  we  have  learned  to  call  the  Son  of  God,  and  the 
Redeemer  of  the  world. 


JESUS'  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD. 

We  are  not  living  in  the  dark  ages.  The  time  when  men 
believed  at  the  bidding  of  priests  has  passed  away,  and  will 
never  return.  The  sooner  we  all  realize  this  fact  the  better. 
The  reformers  of  the  sixteenth  century  did  a  grand  thing  for 
humanity,  when  they  cut  loose  from  Rome,  and  left  its  supersti- 
tions behind  them  forever  more.  But  they  liberated  a  force 
which  was  full  of  danger.  The  mind  once  free,  it  was  inevitable 
that  freedom  should,  in  many  instances,  pass  into  license.  The 


56 


GBOUXBS  OX  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


old  principle  of  ecclesiastical  authority  repudiated,  and  the  God- 
given  rights  of  the  soul  asserted,  what  security — so  the  timid 
asked — remained  for  the  dearest  beliefs  of  men?    It  cannot  he 
denied  that  this  feeling  was  a  natural  one.    Yet  it  is  better  to 
be  free.    The  advantages  of  freedom  are  greater  than  its  risks. 
The  Romanist  still  bravely  upholds  the  authority  of  the  church, 
while  old-time  Protestants  rest  in  the  wisdom  of  confessional 
definitions  and  prescriptions,  but  the  best  men  of  our  time  have 
broken  finally  with  mere  authority,  and  only  ask,  What  is 
truth  ?    The  God  and  the  Christ  ofi'ered  to  the  men  and  women 
of  our  day  must  giv^e  account  of  themselves  at  the  bar  of  the 
understanding  if  their  claims  are  to  be  allowed.    This  is  right. 
It  is  granted,  of  course,  that  the  Finite  cannot  know  thoroughly 
the  Infinite.    But  so  far  forth  as  God  reveals  himself  to  us,  we 
may  know  him,  and  thus  far  the  understanding  can  consider  his 
claims  upon  our  faith.    The  fact  of  a  revelation  is,  therefore, 
determinable  in  part  by  the  character  it  gives  to  the  Supreme 
Object  of  faith  which  it  offers  to  us.    As  an  adoring  believer  in 
the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  I  willingly  accept 
this  test.    I  believe  in  him,  not  simply  because  he  is  offered  to 
me  in  a  book  that  is  venerable  on  the  score  of  its  antiquity,  and 
hallowed  b}"  its  connection  with  the  spiritual  experiences  of  mul- 
titudes of  the  very  best  people  that  have  ever  lived — though  I 
allow  that  this  fact  is  entitled  to  great  weight — ^but  because  the 
representation  of  him  which  comes  to  us  in  its  final  form  through 
the  words  and  deeds  of  Jesus,  is  such  that  my  whole  under- 
standing and  heart  can  most  unhesitatingly  accept  him  as 
worthy  of  supreme  trust  and  joyful  adoration.  He  gives  account 
of  himself  to  my  poor  understanding  in  a  way  that  is  perfectly 
satisfactory.    He  commends  himself  to  my  moral  nature  as  alto- 
gether worthy.    His  perfections  are  more  than  equal  to  the 
highest  demands  of  my  loftiest  thought  of  him.    He  touches  me 
at  every  point  where  there  is  anything  in  me  that  I  dare  to 
regard  as  higher  than  the  earth  ujjon  which  I  tread. 

Now  the  God  that  men  have  thought  of,  and  described  in 


QBOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESIS. 


57 


books  of  theology,  and  in  the  ceremonials  of  their  religion,  does 
not  so  give  account  of  himself  to  me.  If  I  could  see  no  difference 
in  that  conception  of  God  which  is  revealed  in  the  heart  and  life 
of  Jesus,  and  that  other  conception  which  reveals  itself  through 
the  logic  and  metaphysics  of  Calvinism,  for  instance — the  proto- 
type which  was  indeed  in  Calvin's  own  nature,  and  in  that  of  his 
predecessor,  Augustine — I  should  be  confounded  forever.  My 
understanding  would  say  "no" — humbly,  despairingly,  "no," 
and  my  heart  would  cry  out  its  protest  in  a  voice  louder  than  the 
seven  apocalyptic  thunders.  But  there  is  no  mistaking  the  dif- 
ference between  these  two  representations  of  the  Divine  Being. 
It  is  patent  to  the  most  superficial  view.  Believer  and  unbe- 
liever alike  take  cognizance  of  it.  The  character  of  God,  as 
revealed  by  Jesus  Christ,  invites  our  faith,  while  the  view  of 
him  reflected  in  the  Calvinian  theology  repels  faith,  nay,  makes  it, 
to  me,  impossible.  I  do  not  want  to  speak  in  terms  of  exagger- 
ation. I  do  not  doubt  Calvin's  ability  to  believe  in  the  God 
which  he  himself  pictured,  ISTor  do  I  doubt  at  all  the  faith  of 
Calvin's  followers  in  his  own  day.  It  was  not  altogether  their 
fault  that  it  was  so.  It  was  due,  in  a  great  measure,  to  the  lim- 
itations of  their  age.  Nor  was  it  logic  that  was  wanting,  for 
logic,  after  a  certain  fashion,  was  most  abundant.  The  trouble 
was  chiefly  on  the  ethical  side.  The  elements  of  moral  lovable- 
ness  were  not  seen  clearly  in  those  days.  A  man,  it  was  sup- 
posed, might  worship  tremblingly  before  an  Omnipotent  Auto- 
crat, even  though  his  heart  was  not  attracted  to  him.  T7iaf 
could  be  explained  on  the  ground  of  original  sin.  That  he  did 
not  love,  was  his  own  fault.  Slavish  submission  seems  to  have 
been  thought  quite  sufficient  by  the  framers  of  these  now  obso- 
lescent systems.  It  is  not  strange  that  the  men  who  have  inher- 
ited these  old  creeds  are  trying  to  revise  them.  I  know  the 
power  of  early  training.  I  know  the  plastic  mind  of  childhood 
may  be  wrought,  like  the  foot  of  a  Chinese  girl,  into  almost  any 
shape  which  custom  requires.  But  to  an  uncommitted  man  of 
these  last  decades  of  our  nineteenth  century,  surely  anything 


58 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


like  a  real  faith  in  the  Deity  of  Augustine  and  Calvin  is  an  out- 
right impossibility.  And  this  impossibility  is  not  so  much  a 
matter  of  intellectual  growth  as  men  are  apt  to  suppose.  I  wisli 
to  emphasize  this  statement.  The  fact  is  that  the  race  (the  best 
part  of  the  race,  I  mean)  has  obtained  a  surer  grasp  upon  the 
Moral  Ideal  which  it  can  reverence  and  love  than  it  ever  had 
before.  Nor  is  it  that  we  see  the  matter  of  simple  righteousness 
so  much  more  clearly  than  the  fathers  of  the  Reformation  did. 
Their  view  of  righteousness,  as  a  legal  conception,  was  not 
specially  at  fault.  It  was  the  whole  scope  of  the  higher  ethics 
that  eluded  them.  Man  had  not,  as  a  rule,  learned  to  care  for 
his  fellow-man.  The  tyrannous  oppression  of  the  people  by  the 
privileged  classes  did  not  then  strike  any  one  as  much  out  of  the 
way.  The  Fatherhood  of  Grod  was  very  dimly  seen,  and  not  at 
all  felt.  The  brotherhood  of  men  was  practically  not  in  the  ac- 
count. In  such  circumstances  it  was  not  dilScult  for  men  to  be- 
lieve in  a  God  whose  chief  claim  upon  them  was  the  possession 
of  unlimited  power.  It  is  moral  growth,  far  more  than  intel- 
lectiMil,  that  is  causing  men  to  drift  away  from  the  old  theolog- 
ical moorings.  Man  has  never  been  able  to  rise  entirely  above 
himself  in  framing  his  conception  of  the  Being  whom  he  wor- 
shii^s.  If  the  human  soul  were  a  transparency,  and  you  could 
see  ideas  and  moral  images  pictured  within,  as  God  sees  them, 
I  am  persuaded  we  should  find  many  Christians  worshiping  a 
Deity  little  less  than  hideous  to  a  true  moral  sense.  We  do  not 
now  believe  in  a  God  who  sends  unborn  infants  to  hell  by  an 
eternal  decree,  or  damns  all  heathen  souls  for  want  of  faith  in  a 
Saviour  whose  name  they  have  never  heard.  But  the  conception 
of  God  in  the  mind  of  the  average  Christian,  even  to-day,  needs 
to  be  greatly  exalted. 

Only  Christ's  conception  of  God  is  absolutely  perfect.  It  is 
due  to  him  that  our  conception  is  what  it  is.  We  have  not 
grown  up  to  his  ideal  of  the  Eternal  Father  after  all  these  cen- 
turies, and  in  all  the  aeons  of  eternity  we  can  never  pass 
beyond  it.    Depend  upon  it,  Renan  is  right  once,  at  least.  It 


GROUND H  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


59 


is  true  that  "the  consciousness  of  God  in  the  heart  of  Jesus  is 
the  best  the  world  has  ever  had."  We  shall  never  want  any- 
thing better.  This  concej^tion  of  God  cannot  be  outgrown. 
But  how  came  Jesus  to  have  this  unequalled  consciousness  of 
the  perfections  of  the  Infinite  One  ?  As  a  man,  did  he  attain  to 
this  wondrous  knowledge?  As  a  man,  simply,  was  his  own 
nature  so  lofty  that  this  marvelous  ideal  is  only  the  image  of  his 
own  moral  consciousness  objectified?  Is  the  God  that  Jesus 
claimed  as  his  Father,  that  he  taught  us  to  claim  as  our 
Father,  simply  the  image  of  the  man  Jesus  thrown  out  on  the 
canvas  as  by  a  stereopticon,  for  our  acceptance  and  adoration  ? 
How  then  came  Jesus  to  be  such  a  man  ?  This  question  must 
be  answered,  and  answer  to  it  there  is  none,  save  that  which 
Peter  gave  by  revelation  from  the  Fatlier  himself,  namely: 
"  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  Living  God."  All  other 
answers  have  failed  and  will  fail  eternally.  It  has  been  said 
that  the  disciples  of  Jesus  could  not  have  invented  him,  as  a 
writer  of  fiction  invents  his  heroes.  This  is  beyond  doubt  true. 
But  no  more  true,  than  it  is  that  Jesus  as  a  man,  could  not  have 
invented  the  God  whom  he  called  Father,  and  whom  he  wor- 
shiped with  a  perfect  faith. 

Now,  I  grant  that  Jesus  fell  heir,  as  a  true  Israelite,  to  the 
Monotheistic  conception  of  old  Israel,  and  the  later  Judaism. 
I  do  not  say  one  word  to  detract  from  the  grandeur  of  that  con- 
ception. It  was  grand.  That  is  the  right  word  undoubtedly. 
As  a  genuine  nucleus  for  growth  in  human  thought,  under 
divine  assistance,  it  was  altogether  adequate.  But  if  a  man 
says  that  the  one  God,  over  all  and  in  all,  was  no  more  to 
Jesus,  or  even  to  Paul  and  John,  than  he  was  to  Abraham  or 
Moses,  why  then  I  do  not  believe  a  word  of  it.  With  this 
divine  nucleus  the  ancient  people  of  God  associated  insepar- 
ably, in  their  thought  of  him,  many  things  now  impossible  to 
intelligent  and  honest  faith.  The  high-water  mark  of  one's 
thought,  in  his  very  best  mood,  is  not  to  be  taken  as  the  nor- 
mal standard  of  his  elevation.    It  is  not  otherwise  in  insj)ira- 


60 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


tion  and  revelation.  In  Jesus  alone  do  we  see  a  perfect  equi- 
poise of  tlie  soul  always  at  the  highest  level.  He  alone  is 
never  lower  than  his  highest  altitude.  Not  so  Abraham,  Israel, 
Moses  and  the  prophets  of  the  older  dispensations.  They 
never  rose  to  the  level  of  Jesirs.  They  often  fall  below  their 
own  highest  attainment.  I  grant  that  to  the  great  law-giver 
in  the  wilderness,  and  to  the  great  prophets,  like  unto  him, 
whom  God  afterwards  raised  up,  Jahve  was  always  more  than 
a  mere  national  Deity.  They  grasped  clearly  his  ethical 
nature,  and  the  ethical  character  of  their  covenant  with  him. 
To  them  he  was  a  righteous  God,  who  would  reward  and  pun- 
ish men  according  to  their  moral  deserts.  It  is  no  doubt  mar- 
velous that  their  view  of  him  was  lofty.  I  am  sure  it  can  only 
be  accounted  for  by  bringing  in  the  idea  of  revelation  to  aid 
us.  But  we  must  not  suppose  that  this  lofty  idea  of  God  was 
that  of  the  people  generally.  It  would  be  a  great  mistake  if 
we  should.  Only  the  truest  souls  in  those  old  days  had  any 
such  vision  of  the  Eternal.  The  many  followed  then,  as  ever 
since,  at  a  great  distance  behind. 

But  concerning  the  seers  themselves,  it  must  be  remarked 
that  they  had  their  limitations.  Nor  were  they,  as  we  have 
intimated,  alwaj^s  at  their  best.  A  mere  man  can  only  be  held 
above  his  normal  altitude  by  the  constant  pressure  of  the  sup- 
ernatural. In  the  prophets,  there  was  no  such  uniform 
pressure.  In  Jesus  only  was  the  supernatural  an  absolutely 
abiding  reality.  His  life  is  the  sufficient  attestation  of  this 
fact.  In  his  thought  the  conception  of  God  was  a  constant. 
There  was  no  fluctuation  in  his  ideal  of  the  Divine  Being.  And 
this  ideal  was  an  immense  adv^ance  on  that  of  Moses  and  the 
prophets,  to  say  nothing  of  average  Israelites.  This  ought  to 
go  without  argument.  It  will  go  without  argument  among  men 
who  have  studied  these  questions  to  any  real  purpose.  Jesus 
alone  of  all  the  teachers  of  men  has  attained  to  an  absolutely 
perfect  conception  of  the  character  of  the  true  God.  This  fact 
is  sufficient  of  itself  to  determine  his  own  rank  and  dignity. 


0 BOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS.  61 

He  is  the  Christ;  in  a  sense  true  of  none  other,  he  is  the  Son  of 
tlie  Eternal.  He  came  to  reveal  the  Father  to  us,  and,  in  the 
ratio  precisely  of  our  growth  into  liis  similitude,  can  we  ourselves 
knoio  him  whose  Divinity  is  reflected  in  the  lineaments  of  his 
only  begotten  Son.  Depend  upon  it,  the  vmter  of  Hebrews 
made  no  mistake  when  he  declared  Jesus  to  be  "the  brightness 
of  the  Father's  glory  and  the  exact  rejDresentation  of  his  char- 
acter." So  Paul  to  the  Corinthians:  "Seeing  it  is  Gocl,  that 
said.  Light  shall  shine  out  of  darkness,  who  shined  in  our 
hearts,  to  give  the  liglit  of  the  Jcnowledge  of  the  glory  of  God 
in  the  face  of  Jesus  Christ.''''  Jesus  made  no  mistake  when  he 
said  :  "  I  am  the  way,  the  truth  and  the  life.  No  man  cometh 
to  the  Father  but  by  me."  No  man  knoweth  the  Father,  in  the 
high  New  Testament  sense,  otherwise  than  through  Jesus. 
The  only  adequate  idea  of  Him  is  that,  which  accord- 
ing to  the  measure  of  our  own  moral  and  spiritual  possibilities, 
we  have  derived  from  Jesus.  In  this  lofty  sense,  none  knew,  or 
could  know  him  till  Jesus  came. 

JESUS  AS  MEDIATOB. 

The  human  heart,  whenever  it  has  reached  any  lofty  concep- 
tion of  God,  has  been  painfully  conscious  of  the  distance  which 
separates  him  from  us.  The  Eternal  is  righteous,  and  we  are 
sinners  ;  He  is  infinite  in  his  perfections,  while  we  are  finite, 
frail  and  altogether  imperfect  in  spite  of  our  most  strenuous 
endeavors.  Between  this  Infinite  God  and  weak,  sinful  human- 
ity, the  gulf  seems  impassable.  The  idea  of  a  Mediator,  of 
some  one  to  come  between,  and  to  make  a  common  understand- 
ing possible,  though  we  rightly  regard  it  as  a  revelation,  is  yet 
in  itself  most  agreeable  to  the  dictates  of  enlightened  reason. 
We  should  not  therefore  be  surprised  at  all  that  the  conception, 
in  a  crude  form,  has  found  a  place  in  otlier  religions  than 
Christianity.  Its  relation  to  the  consciousness  of  moral  sepa- 
ration will  go  far  to  explain  the  facts  in  such  cases.    It  may, 


62 


GBOUNDS  OX  WHICH  WE 


ACCEPT  JESUS. 


however,  be  thought  a  little  remarkable  that  men  who  have  at 
length  succeeded  in  eliminating  the  idea  of  mediation  entirely 
from  their  own  view  of  religion  should  still  be  able  to  see  very 
clearly  the  rational  basis  upon  which  it  reposes.  Unitarians, 
who  plf-ad  for  immediacy  with  God,  and  reject  the  idea  of 
mediation  altogether,  still  see,  and  to  some  extent  respect,  the 
sound  moral  consciousness  which  furnishes  its  vindication  to 
the  reason. 

But,  in  any  case,  it  cannot  be  denied  that  the  conception  is 
distinctly  embodied  in  the  Christianity  of  the  New  Testament. 
Only  those  advocates  of  a  "  liberal  religion,"  therefore,  who  no 
longer  feel  themselves  bound  by  the  primitive  Christian  ideals, 
could  think  of  surrendering  a  feature  so  clearly  regarded  as 
fundamental  b}^  the  proclaimers  of  the  original  gospel.  A 
leader  of  this  Liberalism  not  long  ago  exclaimed  with  great 
warmth,  "The  faith  of  to-day  is  the  birth  of  to-day,  proving 
itself  worthy  of  its  Christian  past  only  by  holding  as  loyally 
to  its  own  best  thought.  *    To  regard  them  "  (the  N. 

T.  Scriptures)  "  as  the  source  from  which  our  best  beliefs  have 
sj)rung  is  one  thing ;  to  pack  our  beliefs  into  them,  or  insist 
that  they  shall  speak  our  speech,  is  quite  another." 

Clearly  this  means  the  giving  up  of  the  Xew  Testament 
Scriptures  as  a  sufficient  form  of  faith  to  the  men  of  to-day. 
Unless  one  is  ready  to  cut  loose  in  this  way  from  the  ideas  of 
the  whole  primitive  church,  he  must  accept  Christ's  mediation 
as  a  fundamental  fact  in  Christianity. 

The  apostles,  it  must  be  conceded,  were  not  theologians  in 
our  sense  of  the  term.  They  never  sought  to  inculcate  any 
systematic  scheme  of  speculative  beliefs.  They  did  not  trouble 
themselves  concerning  what  are  now  called  the  doctrines  of  the 
gospel.  Their  faith  was  a  profounder  conception  than  that  of 
most  moderns,  and  their  general  aim  as  teachers  was  far  more 
distinctly  practical.  To  turn  men  to  Christ,  to  fill  the  world 
with  the  Spirit  of  Christ,  to  beautify  it  with  the  life  of  Christ 
multiplied  a  million  fold  in  his  disciples — this  was  the  one 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


63 


great  end  never  by  them  lost  sight  of  under  any  circumstances. 
And  yet,  in  the  great  germinant  ideas  of  religion  embodied  in 
their  teaching,  you  may  find  the  whole  of  Christianity.  What 
is  not  herein  taught  expressly,  or  by  good  and  necessary  infer- 
ence, is  of  such  little  weight  that  we  need  give  ourselves  slight 
concern  regarding  it.  The  primitive  gospel  proclamation,  and 
the  primitive  scheme  of  thought,  certainly  left  large  room  for 
Christian  growth  in  knowledge  as  well  as  grace.  But  the  great 
starting-points  were  definitely  fixed ^  and  the  lines,  along  which 
all  growth  should  take  place,  were  unchangeably  determined. 
All  real  progress  since  made  has  been  movement  from  these 
fixed  points,  and  along  these  divinely  predetermined  lines. 
There  are,  no  doubt,  many  true  applications  of  primitive 
teaching  familiar  to  us  to-day  that  the  primitive  Christians 
never  thought  of,  just  because  the  occasions  necessary  to  sug- 
gest them  had  not  yet  come.  A  great  truth  goes  on  multiply- 
ing itself  forever  inhuman  thought,  but  all  possible  multiples 
were  in  the  original  germ.  This  expresses  the  true  relation  of 
the  present  to  the  past  in  Christianity ;  and  further  than  this 
we  do  not  here  need  to  speak. 

Concerning  the  idea  of  meditation,  then,  which  has  not  been 
lost  sight  of  a  single  moment,  I  insist  most  strenuously  that, 
however  men  may  reason,  there  is  no  question  that  it  was  a 
fundamental  conception  in  the  original  gospel ;  that,  in  fact,  it 
runs  through  the  entire  primitive  way  of  conceiving  things,  as 
a  sort  of  spinal  column  of  support  to  the  whole  framework  of 
redemption.  In  Christ,  in  the  sphere  of  Christ,  and  in  the 
relation  the  believer  sustains  to  him,  are  all  blessings  found. 
He  is  "  made  unto  us  wisdom  and  righteousness,  and  sanctifica- 
tion  and  redemption."  We  are  "  baptized  into  him,"  we  pray 
"  in  his  name,"  give  "  thanks  to  the  Father  through  him  ;  "  nay, 
whatsoever  we  do,  whether  we  eat  or  drink,  wake  or  sleep,  we 
are  to  do  all  as  his  disciples.  "  There  is  one  God,  and  one 
mediator  between  God  and  men,  the  man  Christ  Jesus/'  wrote 
Paul  the  aged,  to  his  son  Timothy. 


64 


GBOVNJDS  OX  WEIGH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


Xow  this  Mediatorsllip  of  Jesus  has  its  necessary  implica- 
tions. It  means,  in  the  first  place,  our  separation  from  God  by 
our  sins;  it  means  the  loss  hy  sin  of  our  right  of  direct  approach 
to  the  mercy-seat ;  it  means  that  our  spiritual  blessings  come  to 
us  through  Christ,  or  because  of  him,  that  we  reach  the  ears  of 
the  Father  through  him,  as  the  channel  of  thanksgiving  and 
supplication,  and  that  out  of  him  we  are  without  promise,  or 
hope  ;  it  means  that  if  Jesus  had  not  come,  we  should  have  been 
shut  up  to  condemnation  and  desj^air,  and  that  the  work  of 
Jesus  is  the  reconciliation  of  man  to  God. 

But  this  work  has  yet  further  implications.  A  ]\Iediator 
must  have  adaptation  to  his  office.  His  relations  to  the  parties 
in  estrangement  must  be  such  as  to  fit  him  for  his  task.  A 
mediator  between  God  and  men  must  not,  by  remotest  sus- 
picion, imperil  the  honor  or  interest  of  either  side.  Jesus,  the 
Mediator  of  the  new  covenant,  is  just  the  person  to  undertake 
the  Avork  assigned  him.  He  is  Son  of  God,  he  is  Son  of  man. 
Understanding  these  expressions  as  having  a  ]3arity  of  signifi- 
cance, the  adaptation  of  the  Mediator  to  his  work  is  unques- 
tionable. Taking  any  other  view,  the  logic  of  the  whole 
question  falls  into  inextricable  confusion.  I  am  not  about  to 
go  through  with  the  stock  arguments  of  orthodoxy  on  this 
subject.  I  only  insist  that,  as  Son  of  God,  Jesus  may  be  safely 
trusted  with  the  honor  of  his  Father's  throne,  while  as  Son  of 
man,  his  sympathies  bind  him  forever  to  his  brethren  of  the 
common  humanity. 

There  can  be  no  question  that  this  view  of  Christ's  person, 
and  of  his  office  as  Mediator,  is  found  in  the  New  Testament.  To 
dissent  here,  is  to  depart  from  the  primitive  understanding  of 
the  matter,  beyond  the  shadow  of  a  doubt.  The  problem  of  the 
divine  sonship  of  Jesus  was  explained  both  by  Paul  and  John 
as  an  incarnation.  "Have  this  mind  in  you,  which  was  also  in 
Christ  Jesus ;  who,  being  in  the  form  of  God,  counted  it  not  a 
prize  to  be  on  an  equality  with  God,  but  emptied  himself, 
taking  the  form  of  a  servant,  being  made  in  the  likeness  of 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICE  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


65 


men ;  and  being  found  iu  fashion  as  a  man,  he  humbled  himself, 
becoming  obedient  even  unto  death,  yea,  the  death  of  the  cross." 
Thus  writes  Paul  to  the  Philippians.  This  passage  does  not 
stand  alone.  He  speaks  again  and  again  to  the  same  effect. 
John  tells  us  that  ''In  the  beginning  was  the  Word,"  and  that 
the  "Word  became  flesh."  He  leaves  no  doubt  as  to  his  under- 
standing of  the  sonship  of  Jesus.  To  him  it  meant  the  incarna- 
tion. Now  of  this  New  Testament  conception,  we  may  say, 
there  are  only  two  possible  explanations :  that  of  Arius,  and 
that  which  has  been  accepted  as  orthodox  by  most  Christians, 
through  all  the  centuries.  I  do  not  propose  to  fight  this  old 
battle  over  again.  The  Arian  view  has  practically^  no  adherents 
in  our  day.  I  do  not  think  a  single  biblical  scholar  of  acknowl- 
edged reputation  could  now  be  found  to  defend  it.  Certainly  I 
do  not  know  of  one.  Our  modern  Unitarians  halted  for  a  very 
little  while  in  the  territory  of  Arius.  They  long  since  gave  up 
that  position  as  untenable,  and,  in  so  doing,  they  gave  up  the 
New  Testament  as  their  "rule  of  faith"  on  the  whole  question 
in  debate.  I  do  not  misrepresent  them.  Certainly  they  would 
maintain  that  there  are  some  New  Testament  passages,  and 
among  them  certain  of  the  sayings  of  Christ,  which  will  bear 
quotation  on  their  side.  What  I  insist  on  is  simply  that  they 
no  longer  base  their  contention  on  New  Testament  ground. 
They  no  longer  claim  that  Paul  and  John  held,  or  that  their 
writings  can  be  honestly  reconciled  with, the  doctrine  concerning 
Christ's  person  which  they  at  present  maintain.  This  simply 
means  that  in  giving  up  the  Arian  explanation,  and  accepting 
the  notion  of  the  simple  humanity  of  Jesus,  they  consciously 
gave  up  the  New  Testament  Scriptures  as  a  ground  of  defense. 
Beyond  all  doubt,  they  understood  themselves  when  they  made 
this  surrender.  As  the  discussion  now  stands,  it  is  the  simple 
humanity  of  Jesus  on  one  side,  and  his  divine  sonship,  in  the 
sense  of  an  incarnation,  on  the  other.  Of  course,  it  cannot  be 
held  that  the  Scriptures  represent  Jesus  as  simply  a  man.  If 
this  position  is  to  be  maintained,  it  means  plainly  a  giving  up 


66 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


of  tlie  scriptures  as  the  final  authority  on  this  most  fundamental 
question  of  our  Christian  faith. 

Now  I  have  been  at  the  pains  to  make  this  statement  in 
order  to  make  clear  another  point  in  this  discussion.  I  have 
said  that  the  Christ  offered  to  the  faith  of  men  must  give  a 
satisfactory  account  of  himself  to  the  understanding,  before  his 
claim  can  be  intelligently  accepted.  The  question,  therefore, 
is  this  :  Is  the  incarnate  Son  of  God,  the  Christ  of  New  Testa- 
ment history,  able  to  give  such  an  account  of  himself  to  the 
best  intelligence  of  the  nineteenth  century?  To  answer  this 
affirmatively  is  to  take  Christian  ground ;  to  answer  it  nega- 
tively is  to  take  the  side  of  unbelief;  it  is  to  surrender  the 
New  Testament  as  an  adequate  and  trustworthy  rule  of  faith. 

But  let  there  be  no  misunderstanding  here.  It  is  no  part  of 
my  contention  that  the  doctrine  of  Clirist's  person  set  forth  in 
the  New  Testament  must  be  thoroughly  comprehensible  by  the 
finite  mind  in  order  to  an  intelligent  acceptance  of  it.  Cer- 
tainly the  incarnation,  the  divine  sonship  of  Jesus,  transcends 
the  grasp  of  our  human  faculties.  But  so  does  the  wliole 
Theistic  conception.  If,  therefore,  we  are  going  to  reject  Christ 
because  we  cannot  thoroughly  comprehend  his  whole  being,  we 
must  reject  God  also,  for  the  same  reason.  Here  is  the  point: 
we  may  apprehend,  where  we  do  not  comprehend.  We  may 
take  in  a  great  thought,  an  infinite  thought,  let  us  say,  so  far 
forth  as  it  may  come  within  the  range  of  our  powers,  and,  to  that 
extent,  we  may  judge  of  its  conformity  to  our  highest  standard 
of  reality,  and  receive  or  reject  accordingly,  with  the  perfect 
understanding  that  there  remain  certain  unexplained  elements, 
which  elude  our  highest  powders  of  comprehension.  If  the  con- 
ception of  God  offered  to  men  in  the  gospel  is  satisfactory  to 
the  understanding,  so  far  forth  as  the  understanding  is  capable 
of  taking  cognizance  of  it,  that  is  enough  for  intelligent  faith  in 
God.  In  the  same  way,  if  the  account  of  Christ's  person  given 
in  the  New  Testament  is  such  that  we  can  distinctly  apprehend 
it,  and  if  this  apprehension  is  sufficiently  full  for  us  to  be  able 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


67 


to  judge  of  his  adaptation  to  our  human  needs,  and  his  ability 
to  meet  the  demands  of  our  situation  as  sinners,  then  there  can 
be  nothing  to  prevent  our  acceptance  of  him,  as  thinking  men, 
in  the  character  and  offices  assigned  to  him.  It  is  no  reason 
why  we  should  refuse  to  accept  him,  that  there  are  "unexplored 
remainders "  in  his  nature  that  are  incomprehensible  to  us. 
There  may  be  a  transcendence  of  reason  where  there  is  no  con- 
tradiction to  it.  There  are  many  things  which  we  know  to  be 
true,  and  yet  do  not  know  how  to  bring  them  completely  within 
the  forms  of  the  understanding. 

It  is  sufficient,  then,  if  the  Christ  of  the  Gospel  comes  so  far 
within  the  range  of  our  human  faculties  that  we  are  able  to  see 
his  fitness  for  the  whole  work  of  mediation  and  salvation  which 
he  offers  to  undertake  for  us.  It  is  not  necessary  that  we  should 
be  able  to  explain  the  mysterious  depths  of  his  being  in  order 
to  believe  in  him,  any  more  than  it  is  necessary  for  us  to  know 
all  the  mysteries  of  our  own  being  before  we  can  admit  the  fact 
of  our  existence,  and  the  reality  of  our  commonest  experiences. 

The  God  and  Christ  of  the  New  Testament,  then,  I  hesitate 
not  to  say,  do  give  a  most  satisfactory  account  of  themselves  at 
the  bar  of  human  understanding,  and  any  remaining  incompre- 
hensibility in  the  nature,  or  modus,  of  their  being  is  no  bar  at 
all  to  intelligent  and  devout  faith.  The  God  and  Father  of 
Jesus  is  worthy  of  the  adoration  of  our  hearts,  and  the  Christ  of 
Calvary  is  a  Savior  equal  to  the  task  of  our  redemption  from 
sin,  and  final  translation  to  the  ineffable  glory  of  his  everlasting 
kingdom.  Beyond  this,  human  thought  can  never  go.  Beyond 
this,  it  does  not  need  to  go.  And  yet  there  is  room  for  growth 
even  here.  The  implications  of  the  Christian  ideas  are  practi- 
cally infinite,  and  in  this  illimitable  field  there  is  space  for  end- 
less progress  towards  the  goal  of  absolute  knowledge,  which 
must  still  be  in  the  unexplored  vistas  beyond  us.  It  is  enough 
that  the  conception  of  God,  and  of  Christ,  to  which  we  have  at- 
tained, meets  all  the  demands  of  our  understandings,  and  satis- 
fies the  deepest  aspirations  of  our  anxious,  yet  trusting,  hearts. 


68 


GBOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


THE  BESUEBECTION  OF  JESUS. 

The  religion  of  the  New  Testament,  in  its  last  analysis,  is 
historical,  or  it  is  nothing  at  all.  Paul  says :  "I  declare  to  you 
the  gospel  which  I  first  preached  unto  you ;  that  Jesus  Christ 
died  for  our  sins  according  to  the  Scriptures  ;  and  that  he  was 
buried ;  and  that  he  hath  been  raised  the  third  day  according  to 
the  Scriptures."  1  Cor.  15:  3,  4.  John  says  :  "That  which  we 
beheld,  and  our  hands  handled" — "that  which  we  have  seen  and 
heard,  declare  we  unto  you  also,  that  you  also  may  have  fellow- 
ship with  us ;  yea,  and  our  fellowship  is  with  the  Father,  and 
with  his  Son  Jesus  Christ."    1  Jno.  1 :  1-3. 

Here  is  a  simple  statement  of  facts,  outward  historical  facts, 
things  that  had  been  seen  with  their  eyes  and  heard  with  the 
ears ;  nay,  even  handled  with  the  hands ;  and  such  is  the  as- 
sumed relation  of  these  facts  to  the  whole  gospel  proclamation 
of  the  primitive  church,  that  they  are  represented  as  carrying  in 
themselves  the  complete  scheme  of  essential  Christian  truth.  If 
it  be  objected  that  the  death  of  Jesus  ^'•for  our  sins^^  is  more 
than  a  witness  could  bear  testimony  to  on  the  report  of  his  eyes 
merely,  I  freely  grant  it.  Paul  states  here,  not  the  naked  fact, 
but  the  fact  with  its  spiritual  significance  in  the  history  of  re- 
demption. But  this  afifects  not  the  weight  of  the  testimony. 
The  keystone  of  the  Christian  arch,  historically  considered,  is 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ.  If  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead, 
that  settles  the  meaning  of  his  death  in  the  gospel  message  to 
the  world.  There  is  no  man  who  believes  that  he  did  rise  from 
the  dead,  that  does  not  believe,  on  that  ground,  that  he  died  for 
the  sins  of  the  world.  The  test  question,  therefore,  is  that  of  the 
resurrection  of  Jesus.  If  Jesus  rose  from  the  dead,  he  is  the  Son 
of  God  and  Savior  of  the  world,  according  to  the  terms  of  our 
present  proposition.  The  one  historical  question  of  faith,  there- 
fore, is  that  of  our  Lord's  resurrection.  This  proved,  everything  is 
proved ;  this  disproved,  or  shown  to  be  incredible,  and  Chris- 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


69 


tianity  as  a  faith,  as  a  religion  falls  for  want  of  an  adequate  his- 
torical foundation. 

For  the  moment,  I  pass  Paul's  personal  testimony  to  the  res- 
urrection, and  also  his  epitome  of  the  personal  testimony  of 
others,  given  in  connection  with  the  passage  I  have  quoted,  for 
the  purpose  of  calling  attention  to  the  collective  testimony  of 
the  entire  primitive  church.  I  do  not  mean  by  this  that  every 
single  disciple  in  those  days  was,  strictly  speaking,  a  competent 
witness  to  testify  in  this  case,  but  rather  that  the  collective  faith 
of  the  whole  Christian  brotherhood,  under  circumstances  which 
gave  them  the  opportunity  of  knowing  everything,  is  worth 
something,  as  over  and  above,  the  direct  testimony  of  those  who 
actually  saw  the  risen  Lord,  and  rested  their  faith  in  what  they 
thus  held  to  be  infallible  proofs.  What  I  mean,  if  I  can  make 
it  clear,  is  that  the  universal  acceptance  of  the  Lord's  resurrec- 
tion by  the  first  Christians  shows  that  the  proofs  were  sufficient 
to  satisfy  every  one  of  them  at  a  time,  when  the  assumed  fact 
had  just  taken  place,  and  the  means  of  correction  must  certainly 
have  been  abundant  in  case  either  of  fraud,  or  mistake,  on  the 
part  of  actual  witnesses.  So  that  the  faith  of  those  who  were 
not  eye-witnesses,  strictly  speaking,  is  by  no  means  without  ev- 
idential weight  to  us  now  in  our  eiforts  to  reach  a  trustworthy 
conclusion,  in  the  light  of  all  the  facts.  That  the  faith  of  all 
these  men  who  periled  their  fortunes  and  their  lives  in  advocacy 
of  the  gospel,  in  the  midst  of  the  very  circumstances  which  gave 
them  the  means  of  knowing  whether  it  was  a  delusion  or  a  real- 
ity, is  entitled  to  no  small  consideration,  at  the  present  day, 
seems,  I  should  say,  to  be  a  plain  proposition.  In  point  of  fact, 
the  position  on  which  I  am  here  insisting  is  virtually,  or  per- 
haps I  should  say  actually,  admitted  by  one  of  the  shrewdest 
and  most  thoughtful  of  the  numerous  doubters  of  our  day.  I  al- 
lude, as  many  of  my  readers  will  knovv^,  to  William  Rathbone 
Greg,  author  of  the  well-known  book  entitled  The  Creed  of 
Christendom.    I  quote  from  this  book  the  following  passage: 

"It  was  remarked  by  a  friendly  critic  of  my  first  edition  that 


70 


GBOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


in  approacliing  the  question  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ  from 
the  side  of  the  Gospels  instead  of  from  that  of  the  epistles,  I  had 
thrown  away  the  main  strength  of  the  case.    The  criticism  is 
just,  and  I  have  since  reconsidered  the  subject  from  the  point  of 
view  suggested." 

He  then  proceeds  to  quote  the  passages  from  Paul  to  the 
Corinthians  which  I  have  given  above,  and  to  make  some  just 
statements  regarding  the  dates  of  the  Gosj^els  and  the  incon- 
testably  earlier  date  of  this  epistle  of  Paul.  He  afterwards  con- 
tinues as  follows  : 

"If  this  were  all — if  we  had  no  further  testimony  to  the  res- 
urrection of  Jesus  from  the  dead  than  that  it  was  believed  by  the 
whole  original  Christian  church ;  that  the  apostles  and  early  fol- 
lowers of  Christ,  who  must  be  supposed  to  have  had  the  best 
means  of  knowing  it,  clung  to  the  conviction  enthusiastically, 
and  witnessed  to  it  by  their  preaching  and  death ;  and  that 
Paul,  not  a  personal  follower,  but  in  constant  communication 
with  those  who  were,  made  the  above  assertion  in  a  letter  ad- 
dressed to  one  of  the  principal  churches,  and  published  while 
most  of  the  eye-witnesses  to  whom  he  appeals  were  still  living 
to  confirm  or  to  contradict  his  statements — if  the  case  rested  on 
this  only  and  terminated  here,  every  one,  I  think,  would  feel 
that  our  grounds  for  accepting  the  resurrection  as  an  historical 
fact  in  its  naked  simplicity  would  be  far  stronger  than  they  ac- 
tually are.  In  truth  they  would  appear  to  be  nearly  unassaila- 
ble and  irresistible,  except  by  those  who  can  imagine  some  prob- 
able mode  in  which  such  a  positive  and  vivifying  conviction 
could  have  grown  up  without  the  actual  occurrence  having  taken 
place  to  create  it." 

He  then  mentions  the  explanation  offered  by  Strauss,  by  Re- 
nan  and  Arnold,  by  Hanson  and  others,  and  says  that  he  has 
"dispassionately  considered"  them  all,  and  that  "ingenious  as 
they  are  (especially  the  detailed  one  of  M.  Renan)"  he  is  "bound 
to  say  they  do  not  satisfy  his  mind."  "Nor  can  I,"  he  continues, 
"with  any  confidence,  ofier  one  of  my  own,  though  I  can  conceive 


GIWUNUS  OX  WHICH  Wi:  accept  JESUS. 


71 


one  more  simple  and  inherently  likely  than  those  propounded." 

It  will  be  distinctly  noticed  that  the  feature  of  the  case  which 
specially  impresses  Mr.  Greg  is  the  collective  faith,  and  the  evi- 
dence therein  embodied,  of  the  whole  original  Christian  church. 
It  does  not  positively  convince  him,  as  it  seems  it  ought  to  have 
done,  but  it  greatly  staggers  him.  His  only  escape  is  through 
imaginary  contradictions  between  Paul's  account  and  the  repre- 
sentations given  in  the  Gospels.  It  is  a  mark  of  frankness  and 
candor,  that  he  accepts  so  readily  the  point  that  was  made 
against  him  by  his  critic.  It  is  a  good  point  unquestionably. 
It  is  a  fact  that  in  approaching  the  question  of  our  Lord's  resur- 
rection only  through  the  very  brief  and  fragmentary  accounts  in 
the  closing  chapters  of  the  Gospels,  he  threw  away  the  strongest 
part  of  the  testimony.  It  is  refreshing  to  see  him  admit  this 
when  his  attention  is  called  to  it.  Prof.  Theodore  Keim  of 
Zurich, in  his  elaborate  life  of  Jesus  from  the  rationalistic  point 
of  view,  was  impressed  with  the  same  feature  of  the  argument. 
Like  Mr.  Greg,  he  sees  contradictions  between  Paul  and  the 
Evangelists,  and,  as  to  the  latter,  contradictions  among  them- 
selves. These  assumed  contradictions  are  held  to  be  destruct- 
ive of  their  testimony.  But  the  accounts  in  the  epistles  are  al- 
lowed to  have  weight,  if  they  could  be  taken  by  themselves.  In- 
deed Prof,  Keim  does  take  them  as  the  only  real  ground  to 
build  upon,  and  constructs  his  own  theory  upon  the  basis  of 
their  statements.    Of  this  we  shall  see  more  presently. 

For  the  moment,  however,  let  us  fix  our  minds  upon  the 
single  question  of  contradictions.  It  is  admitted  by  every  one, 
that  slight  discrepancies  among  ordinary  witnesses  rather 
strengthen  than  damage  their  testimony.  If,  therefore,  it 
should  appear  that  there  are  irreconcilable  differences  in  unim- 
portant detail  between  the  Evangelists  and  Paul,  or  between 
the  Evangelists  themselves,  that  fact  is  for  them  rather  than 
against  them,  according  to  this  well-established  rule.  It  is 
only  when  a  theory  of  inspiration  is  maintained  which 
excludes  the  operation  of  this  rule,  that  we  are  not  entitled  to 


72 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


its  benefit.  /  claim  the  application  of  the  rule.  Now  are  these 
supposed  differences  fundamental  ?  Do  tliey  affect  the  essential 
facts  of  the  history  ?  Clearly  they  do  not.  They  are  simply 
variations  of  statement  in  matters  of  slight  significance  :  indeed 
of  no  significance  at  all,  if  considered  in  relation  to  their  own 
weight.  Prof.  Keira  insists  that  Paul  must  be  understood  as 
giving  a  full  account  of  all  the  instances  of  our  Lord's  appear- 
ance after  his  resurrection  to  any  of  the  disciples.  But  this  is 
sheer  arbitrariness.  I  am  astonished  that  Keim  should  offer 
such  a  contention. 

Bat  this  groundless  assumption  duly  discounted,  and  the 
contradictions  between  Paul  and  the  Evangelists,  for  the  most 
part  at  least,  disappear.  I  will  not  argue  against  Prof.  Keim's 
assumption.  On  the  face  of  the  question,  it  is  altogether  gratu- 
itous. Thus  far,  then,  we  have  clear  sailing.  But  what  about 
the  discrepancies  among  the  Evangelists  ?  They  deserve  more 
attention.  And  it  must  be  said,  in  beginning,  that  no  perfectly 
satisfactory  Avay  of  harmonizing  all  details  has  ever  been  sug- 
gested. I  know  what  this  means,  but  I  have  no  patience  with 
the  contrary  claim.  It  is  uncandid.  I  will  have  none  of  it. 
But  to  say  that  there  has  been  no  complete  harmony  offered,  is 
not  to  say  there  are  real  contradictions.  That  is  a  very  dif- 
ferent question.  Touching  this  question,  however,  my  argu- 
ment does  not  require  me  to  affirm  or  deny.  What  then  ?  I 
say  this :  The  accounts  of  the  Evangelists  are  confessedly 
fragmentary.  No  single  one  of  them  can  be  presumed  to  have 
mentioned  all  the  manifestations  of  our  risen  Lord  concerning 
which  he  had  knowledge.  No  one  of  them  hints  that  his 
account  is  meant  to  be  complete.  Nor  are  the  collected  mani- 
festations of  the  Four  offered  to  us  as  a  complete  history  of 
everything.  These  accounts  are  then  beyond  doubt  fragment- 
ary, partial,  incomplete  statements  of  the  case.  That  difficul- 
ties should  arise  in  patting  such  accounts  together  so  as  to 
make  a  perfectly  consistent  whole,  was  to  be  expected.  Noth- 
ing short  of  a  miracle  directed  to  that  particular  end  could 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


73 


have  prevented  it.  Apparent  discrepancies  without  sucli  a 
miracle  were  inevitable,  and  apparent  discrepancies  do  exist. 
The  miracle  in  this  case  was  not  wrought.  And  furthermore, 
these  discrepancies  have  thus  far  defied  the  skill  of  har- 
monists. It  is  simpl  ^  honesty  to  say  this.  But  may  not  this 
inability  to  offer  a  complete  harmony  spring  from  the  very  brief 
and  fragmentary  character  of  the  several  accounts  without 
implying  that  the  discrepancies  are  real  ?  Certainly  I  think  so. 
The  case  then  stands  thus  :  (a)  It  is  not  certain  that  real  dis- 
crepancies exist,  though  we  confess  that  a  satisfactory  harmony 
has  not  been  effected,  (b)  But  if  there  are  real  discrepancies 
in  mere  detail,  the  united  testimony  is  thereby  made  stronger, 
not  weaker.  It  shows  there  was  no  conspiracy  to  practice  a 
fraud.  It  shows  that  the  accounts  were  honestly  written, 
though  in  some  matters  unessential  to  the  main  fact  the  writ- 
ers may  have  been  imperfectly  informed.  In  either  case  the 
testimony  is  sincere,  the  agreement,  as  to  essential  facts,  com- 
plete, and  the  argument  conclusive. 

If,  however,  the  reader  is  anxious  to  press  the  question  of 
harmonistic  accuracy  of  detail  to  a  more  satisfactory  conclu- 
sion, I  cannot  do  better  than  to  direct  him  to  Canon  Westcott's 
Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of  John,  as  the  last  and  best 
attempt  in  that  direction  vath  which  I  am  acquainted.  He 
will  find  a  chronological  statement  of  the  events  of  the  first 
"Easter  day,"  that  has  been  arranged  with  scholarly  care  and 
discrimination,  and  if  it  does  not  fully  satisfy,  it  cannot  fail  to 
be  helpful  to  him.  For  myself,  however,  I  confess  an  admira- 
tion for  Dean  Alford,  who,  among  New  Testament  commenta- 
tors, if  not  the  ablest,  is  still,  for  unflinching  intellectual  hon- 
esty, "the  noblest  Roman  of  them  all."  Summing  up  on  this 
subject,  at  the  close  of  his  great  work  on  the  Gospels,  he  says: 
"/  attempt  no  harmony  of  the  accounts;  I  hellem  all  such 
attempts  to  be  fruitless;  and  I  see  in  their  failure  strong 
corroboration  of  the  truth  of  the  evangelic  narratives. ''''  A 
little  further  on  he  says,  "I  believe  much  that  is  now  dark 


74 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


might  be  explained  were  the  facts  themselves,  in  their  order 
of  occurrence,  before  us.  Till  that  is  the  case,  we  must  be 
content  to  walk  by  faith,  not  by  sight." 

In  this  whole  view  I  do  most  fully  concur.  But  I  emphasize 
the  fact  that  our  inability  to  construct  a  complete  harmony 
does  by  no  means  establish  actual  disagreement,  and  also  that^ 
if  actual  disagreement  in  mere  incidental  circumstances  were 
bej'ond  doubt  established,  the  argument  would  not  be  thereby 
weakened.  The  strength  of  any  case  is  in  the  agreement  of  the 
witnesses  as  to  the  essential  facts.  Minor  differences  only  go  to 
make  the  testimony  stronger.    This  rule  must  stand. 

But  the  testimony  of  the  Apostle  Paul  demands  special  con- 
sideration. After  saying  (v.  4)  that  "Christ  had  been  raised 
from  the  dead  the  third  day,  according  to  the  scripture,"  he 
adds : 

"xlnd  that  he  appeared  unto  Cephas :  then  to  the  twelve ; 
then  he  appeared  to  above  live  hundred  brethren  at  once,  of 
whom  the  greater  part  remain  until  now,  but  some  are  fallen 
asleep;  then  he  appeared  unto  James  ;  then  to  all  the  apostles  ; 
and  last  of  all,  as  unto  one  born  out  of  due  time,  he  appeared  to 
me  also."    (1  Cor.  15:  5—8.) 

I  desire  to  note  here,  in  the  first  place,  that  Paul's  testimony 
includes  much  more  than  what  he  himself  saw  and  heard  on  the 
road  to  Damascus.  It  is  granted,  of  course,  that  he  could  not, 
in  strictness  of  legal  sjDeech,  be  said  to  testify  to  anything  heard 
and  seen  by  others,  but  then  he  could  tell  what  he  had  heard 
from  the  lips  of  others,  so  that  we  get  their  positive  testimony 
as  to  the  things  which  they  had  witnessed,  at  second  hand  only, 
let  us  say,  through  Paul.  This  is  all  that  we  need.  If  Paul's 
report  is  trustworthy  (a  matter  that  no  one  doubts),  then 
we  have,  through  him,  the  testimony  of  the  other '  witnesses 
whose  names  he  here  mentions.  For  Paul  expressly  tells 
us  in  Galatians  (1:  18,  19),  that  on  his  return  from  Arabia  to 
Damascus,  three  j^ears  after  his  conversion,  he  went  to  Jerusa- 
lem to  visit  Peter,  and  that  he  abode  with  him  fifteen  days.  He 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


75 


saw  also  James,  the  Lord's  brother.  When  Paul  says,  therefore, 
that  the  risen  Lord  appeared  to  Peter  and  James,  we  cannot 
doubt  that  he  had  the  fact  from  their  own  lips.  So  also,  when 
he  mentions  other  manifestations,  we  are  fully  entitled  to  hold 
that  he  had  received  his  information  direct  from  the  eye-wit- 
nesses themselves,  or  in  such  other  way  as  to  exclude  the  possi- 
bility of  doubt.  In  other  words,  he  had  the  direct  testimony  of 
the  Jerusalem  circle  of  disciples,  as  the  basis  of  the  statement 
which  he  here  makes.  Of  the  five  hundred  witnesses  to  the 
memorable  manifestation  on  the  mountain  in  Galilee,  he  had 
seen  some  who  still  survived,  and  could  refer  to  the  fact  as  a 
matter  well-known  among  the  original  disciples.  In  this  way, 
we  get  a  trustworthy  historical  basis  for  our  faith  quite  inde- 
pendent of  the  Gospels.  This  is  a  matter  of  some  importance  in 
this  discussion.  For,  although  we  do  not  listen  a  moment  to  the 
objections  urged  against  the  accounts  in  the  Gospels,  yet  there 
is  a  great  point  gained  Avhen  we  are  able  to  appeal  to  testimony 
that  is  not  in  dispute.  That  Paul  wrote  1  Corinthians  is  admit- 
ted. His  testimony,  therefore,  must  be  considered ;  and,  as  I 
have  said,  not  only  as  to  what  he  himself  saw,  but  as  to  what  he 
reports  to  us  on  the  jiositive  testimony  of  others,  which  he  had 
presumably  received  from  their  own  lips.  It  is  to  be  regarded  as 
providential,  I  doubt  not,  that,  in  an  age  when  scarcely  anything 
escapes  questioning,  we  still  have  this  confessedly  genuine  tes- 
timony to  the  historical  ground- work  of  our  Christian  faith.  In 
Paul,  we  reach  back  beyond  the  dates  of  the  earliest  Gospels, 
beyond  even  the  dates  of  Paul's  own  epistles,  to  the  beginning 
of  his  oral  testimony  as  a  preacher,  which  carries  us  within  lit- 
tle more  than  a  single  decade  of  years  from  the  occurrence  of  the 
resurrection  itself.  For  it  cannot  be  doubted  that  what  Paul 
here  writes  to  the  Corinthians  had  been,  for  substance,  in  his 
oral  preaching  from  the  very  commencement  of  his  apostolic  ca- 
reer. We  thus  reach  with  unquestioned  authority  a  period  when 
all  the  original  witnesses  were  still  living  and  bearing  unbroken 


76 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


testimony  to  the  great  facts  upon  which  our  historical  Christian- 
ity securely  rests. 

But  it  is  necessary  to  pay  special  attention  to  Paul's  personal 
testimony  to  the  resurrection  of  Jesus.  Paul  was  himself  an 
eye-witness  in  the  case.  "And  last  of  all,"  he  says,  "as  to  one 
born  out  of  due  time,  he  appeared  to  me  also."  This  is  testimony 
direct.  In  his  letter  to  the  Galatians  he  insists  on  his  independent 
knowledge  of  the  fandamental  gospel  facts.  He  had  not  received 
them,  at  first,  from  the  older  apostles,  but  by  a  direct  revelation 
from  Jesus  Christ.  That  this  refers  to  his  wonderful  experience 
near  Damascus  cannot  be  doubted.  To  the  Corinthians,  he 
says:  "Am  I  not  an  apostle  ?  Have  I  not  seen  Jesus  Christ  our 
Lord  ?  Are  not  ye  my  work  in  the  Lord  ?"  (1  Cor.  9:  1,  2.)  In 
his  defense  before  Agrippa  he  testifies  in  these  words : 
"Whereupon  as  I  journeyed  to  Damascus,  with  the  authority 
and  commission  of  the  chief  priests,  at  mid-day,  O  King,  I  saw 
a  light  from  heaven,  above  the  brightness  of  the  sun,  shining 
round  about  me,  and  them  that  journeyed  with  me.  And  when 
Ave  were  all  fallen  to  the  earth,  I  heard  a  voice  saying  unto  me,  in 
the  Hebrew  language,  Saul,  Saul,  why  persecutest  thou  me  ? 
It  is  hard  for  thee  to  kick  against  the  goad.  And  I  said.  Who 
art  thou,  Lord  ?  And  the  Lord  said,  I  am  Jesus  whom  thou  per- 
secutest. But  arise,  and  stand  upon  thy  feet :  for  to  this  end 
have  I  appeared  unto  thee,  to  appoint  thee  a  minister  and  a  wit- 
ness both  of  the  things  wherein  thou  hast  seen  me,  and  of  the 
things  wherein  I  will  appear  unto  thee  ;  delivering  thee  from  the 
people,  and  from  the  Gentiles,  unto  whom  I  send  thee,  to  open 
their  eyes,  that  they  may  turn  from  darkness  to  light,  and  from 
the  power  of  Satan  unto  God,  that  they  may  receive  remission 
of  sins  and  inheritance  among  them  that  are  sanctified  by  faith 
in  me."  (Acts  26:  12-17.)  This  testimony  is  certainly  remark- 
able, to  say  the  least.  If  it  is  to  be  taken  in  an  outward,  histor- 
ical sense,  there  can  be  no  mistake  as  to  its  significance.  I  de- 
sire to  insist  here  Avith  all  the  emphasis  which  I  can  command, 
that  it  can  only  be  thus  understood.    We  are  not  in  the  region 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


77 


of  poetry  or  pictorial  representation  here.  In  God's  revelation 
of  himself  to  the  world  every  true  thing  has  its  place.  This  is 
history.  Paul  says  a  light  from  heaven  shone  round  about  him, 
and  about  them  that  journeyed  with  him.  He  says  he  heard  a 
voice  speaking  to  him  in  the  Hebrew  language.  He  heard  dis- 
tinctly the  words.  He  says  he  answered  also  in  words.  He 
says  also,  (Acts  22:  9)  "And  they  that  were  with  me  beheld  in- 
deed the  light,  but  they  heard  not  (that  is,  so  as  to  understand,) 
the  voice  of  him  that  spake  to  me."  It  is  expressly  said  (Acts 
9:7)  that  those  who  were  with  him  "heard  the  voice,  but  saw  no 
man."  It  is,  of  course,  not  to  be  thought  for  a  moment  that 
Luke,  in  making  his  own  report,  could  have  contradicted  the  ac- 
count which  he  gives  us  in  Paul's  own  words  only  a  little  further 
along.  So  the  straightforward  account  is  that  Paul's  fellow- 
travelers  saw  the  light  and  heard  the  voice,  but  not  so  as  to  dis- 
tinguish the  words  which  were  said.  This  takes  the  whole  trans- 
action out  of  the  category  of  mere  subjective  "visions,"  or  im- 
pressions, and  puts  it  distinctly  into  that  of  actual,  outward  re- 
ality. This  cannot  be  denied.  Paul's  testimon}^,  therefore,  is 
to  the  actual,  outward  appearance  of  the  risen  Lord  to  him,  so 
that  he  saw  him  in  that  envelope  of  celestial  light  and  glor}^, 
and  "heard  the  words  of  his  mouth."  (See  Acts  22  :  12-14.)  But, 
if  we  are  right  in  this  view  of  Paul's  account,  there  can  be  but 
little  ground  for  skeptical  questioning  left.  It  might  be  said 
that  Paul  was  the  subject  of  an  optical  illusion.  And  it  might 
be  argued  that  there  is  a  basis  for  such  an  explanation  in  the 
supposed  fact  that  Paul  was  always  apparently  a  sufferer  from 
some  sort  of  ophthalmic  trouble.  Or  it  might  still  be  insisted 
that  Paul  describes  the  occurrence  as  a  "vision,"  (Acts  26  :  19) 
and  that  it  appears  from  his  own  words,  in  2  Cor.  12  :  1-7,  that 
he  was  favored  with  many  such  "visions  and  revelations  of  the 
Lord."  And  it  might  even  be  urged  that,  on  this  ground,  as  we 
distinctly  learn  from  the  Clementine  Homilies,*  his  Judaizing 
enemies  denied  his  claim  to  the  apostleship.    But  no  such  es- 

*See  quotation  in  Farrar's  Lite  and  Work  ot  Paul,  p.  109,  note  1. 


78 


GROUNDS  ON  WEIGH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


cape  from  the  plain  facts  of  the  case  is  possible.  The  term  "vis- 
ion" might  be  thouglit  ambiguous,  perhaps,  if  nothing  had  been 
said  to  remove  the  possible  uncertainty  as  to  its  import.  But 
Paul  himself  settles  that  question.  "Am  I  not  an  apostle  ?  Have 
I  not  seen  Jesus  Christ,  the  Lord?"  Besides,  it  is  not  to  be  sup- 
posed for  a  moment  that  any  subjective  impression  could  have 
afforded  a  basis  for  the  unstaggering  faith  which  characterized 
his  life  from  that  day  till  the  date  of  his  triumphant  martyrdom 
at  Rome.  During  his  long  and  wonderfally  chequered  career, 
he  never  hesitated,  never  doubted,  in  a  solitary  instance.  In 
perils  on  land  and  on  sea,  by  day  and  by  night,  among  his  un- 
believing fellow-countrymen,  and  worse  still,  among  tbose  who 
falsely  wore  the  livery  of  his  Divine  Master,  he  was  at  all  times 
the  same  steadfast,  immovable,  devout  believer  in  the  Messiali- 
shijj  of  the  risen  Nazarene.  The  memory  of  this  experience 
never  left  him  for  a  single  instant.  It  was  no  dream,  no  wild 
delirium  of  a  heated  imagination,  that  furnished  the  faith-basis 
of  that  wonderful  life,  I  do  not  see  how  any  one  can  seriously 
maintain  the  contrary  view.  I  am  sure  that  the  whole  question 
must  have  been  very  lightly  touched  by  John  Stuart  Mill  and 
John  Fiske,  or  they  could  not  have  thought  of  offering  explana- 
tions so  utterly  unsatisfactory  to  a  serious  inquirer.* 

But  we  need  to  look  still  more  closely  at  the  fact  of  the 
Apostle's  conversion,  if  we  would  thoroughly  comprehend  its 
signihcance.  I  call  attention  now  to  its  suddenness.  It  was 
clearly  not  the  result  of  ordinary  causes.  There  is  no  hint  of  a 
prior  consideration  of  the  claims  of  the  Gospel.  There  was  no 
such  thing  in  his  case  as  the  leaven  of  divine  truth  slowly  gain- 
ing influence  in  his  heart.  Down  to  the  very  moment  of  Christ's 
appearance  to  him  he  was  a  bigoted,  though  devout,  Pharisee, 
and  a  bitter  opponent  of  Christ  and  the  new  religion.  His  con- 
victions were  deep-rooted  and  intensely  strong.  His  feelings 
were  thoroughly  enlisted.  The  whole  man  was  on  the  other 
side.    Take  notice  that  this  is  true  down  to  the  very  moment  of 

•Mill's  "Essays  on  Keligion,"  p.  239.  "Unseen  World,"  pp.  130, 131. 


GROUNDS  ON  WEIGH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


79 


his  conversion.  The  approach  of  our  Lord  to  Saul  of  Tarsus  was 
not  at  all  on  the  emotional  side  of  his  nature.  Doubtless  his 
experience  of  the  saving  power  of  Judaism  had  not  been  satis- 
factory, but  that  he  was  to  find  in  the  gospel  what  he  had  failed 
to  find  in  the  law,  had  not  once  occurred  to  him.  He  was  on  his 
way  to  Damascus,  with  a  commission  from  the  chief  priests  at 
Jerusalem,  to  arrest  and  bring  to  judgment  before  the  Sanhe- 
drim the  disciples  of  the  Lord.  He  himself  says  he  was  "ex- 
ceedingly mad  against  them."  The  whole  account  shows  clear- 
ly that  no  change  in  his  mind,  not  even  the  least,  had  taken 
place,  till  the  stupendous  scene  of  the  divine  manifestation 
burst  upon  his  astonished  vision.  The  first  element  in  his  con- 
version was,  therefore,  a  change  of  conviction  :  a  change  from  de- 
liberate unbelief  to  unquestioning  faith.  In  this  case  the  dem- 
onstration was  ocular,  from  without,  not  from  within.  I  grant 
that  if  Paul  could  have  been  so  convinced  by  a  mere  subjective 
impression  (call  it  vision,  if  one  insists  on  doing  so)  that  doubt 
thereafter  became  impossible  to  him,  the  e^&ct  on  his  future  life 
would  have  been,  for  the  most  part,  the  same.  But  I  deny  tliat 
such  an  impression  could  have  produced  his  unstaggering  faith. 
There  must,  in  such  case,  have  come,  inevitably,  a  time  of  men- 
tal reaction,  followed  by  questioning  and  doubt.  Paul  was  too 
clear-headed  to  build  upon  a  mere  hallucination.  Such  founda- 
tion would  not  have  sufficed  for  all  those  after-years  of  toil  and 
trial.  No ;  the  scene  was  not  an  illusion  ;  it  was  a  blessed  real- 
ity. He  did  see  the  Lord ;  he  did  hear  the  music  of  that  divine 
voice.  He  never  forgot  it  till  the  day  he  was  taken  home.  There 
is  no  other  sufficient  explanation  of  the  wonderful  facts  of  his 
life.  I  insist  that  the  whole  change  was  due  to  what  he  saw. 
In  its  beginning  it  was  a  change  of  the  intellect.  It  was  the  ac- 
ceptance of  Jesus  as  the  Christ,  and  the  surrender  of  his  Judaic 
faith,  in  so  far  as  it  might  not  consist  with  that  new  fact.  But 
what  a  blaze  of  light  this  one  new  fact  let  into  his  soul !  In- 
stantly the  process  of  re-adjustment  begins.  His  life  must  now 
be  set  right,  and  straightway  he  says,  "Lord,  what  wilt  thou 


80 


G BOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


have  me  to  do  ?"  The  getting  rid  of  errors  in  thought,  and  re- 
placing them  with  new  truth,  the  truth  as  it  is  in  Christ,  was  nec- 
essarily a  slower  work.  This  work,  we  say  reverently,  demand- 
ed the  experience  in  Arabia,  its  meditations,  its  insi^irations,  a 
divine  quickening  of  the  potentialities  of  his  whole  inner  man, 
in  order  to  a  full  preparation  for  the  life-toil  to  which  he  had 
now  received  his  heavenly  call  and  commission.  Nay,  we  say 
this  divine  process  of  increasing  spiritual  illumination  continued 
through  his  entire  apostolic  activity,  down  to  the  day  of  his 
martyr-triumph,  in  the  imperial  city  of  Rome.  So,  while  we  ac- 
cept confidently  the  testimony  of  the  Gospels,  we  build  with 
yet  greater  assurance,  if  possible,  upon  the  clear-cut, 
ringing  statements  of  the  apostle,  born  indeed  out  of  due  time, 
but  "in  labors  more  abundant,"  in  achievements  more  renowned, 
than  any  of  his  colleagues  in  the  great  work  of  winning  the 
world  to  Christ. 

It  is  not  to  be  thought  strange  that  Prof.  Theodore  Keim, 
thorough-going  rationalist  though  he  was,  should  feel  the  force 
of  Paul's  testimony.  He  does  not  believe  in  a  bodily  resurrec- 
tion, he  arbitrarily  (for  when  was  a  German  critic  not  arbi- 
trary ?)  pronounces  the  Gospel  testimony  mythical,  and,  there- 
fore, of*little  value  historically  considered;  but  in  the  presence 
of  Paul,  he  pauses  reverently,  and  asks,  "  what  are  the  facts  ?  " 
And  how  does  he  answer  this  question  ?  Strangely  enough,  as 
one  may  say,  he  maintains  that  the  appearances  mentioned  by 
Paul — all  of  them — were  actual,  historical — not  bodily,  but  still 
actual — manifestations  of  the  yet  living  Jesus,  who  had  indeed 
been  crucified,  but  was  now  glorified ! !  This  is  triumph 
enough ! 

Keim  begins,  as  I  have  said  above,  by  rejecting  the  doctrine 
of  a  bodily  resurrection.  He  then  passes  in  review  the  various 
exi^lanations  that  have  been  offered.  He  dwells  especially 
upon  the  theory  of  a  self-generated,  or,  otherwise,  humanly- 
generated  "vision  ;  "  and  though  he  grants  that  it  has  much  in 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


81 


its  favor,  he  rejects  it  as  unsatisfactory.  Aud,  now,  let  us  listen 
to  him  in  a  few  sentences  : 

"  If  the  visions  are  not  something  self-generated  or  humanly- 
generated,  if  they  are  not  blossom  and  fruit  of  an  illusion-pro- 
ducing over-excitement,  if  they  are  not  something  strange  and 
mysterious,  if  they  are  directly  accompanied  by  astonishingly 
clear  perceptions  and  resolves^  then  there  still  remains  one 
originating  source,  hitherto  unmentioned,  namely,  God  and  the 
glorified  Christ." - 

A  few  sentences  further  along  he  returns  to  this  point: 
"Unless  we  arbitrarily  introduce  into  the  reports  a  fresh 
element,  the  production  of  the  appearances  is  to  be  ascribed, 
not  to  God,  but  to  him  whose  presence  was  observed."  Again 
he  says  : 

"If  it  be  objected  that  the  dilBculties  of  the  vision-theory 
are  thus  in  a  weakened  form  renewed  .  ...  it  can  be 
replied,  that  if  the  power  that  produces  the  vision  comes,  as 
according  to  our  view  it  does,  entirely  from  without,  and  the 
subjective  seeing  is  merely  the  reflex-form  of  what  is  objective, 
the  immediate  cessation  of  the  seeing  and  the  will  to  see,  as 
soon  as  the  operating  power  ceases  to  operate,  becomes  perfectly 
intelligible."    Once  more : 

"  But  to  have  brought  to  light  and  unveiled  what  otherwise 
exists  in  the  human  mind  only  as  an  obscure  sentiment,  a  con- 
fused idea,  a  mere  impression  of  the  immediate  consciousness, 
was  the  prerogative,  the  human  prerogative,  of  Jesus,  inasmuch 
as  he  revealed  himself  to  his  followers  in  an  incontestable 
manner.  His  prerogative  was  based  upon  the  pre-eminence  of 
his  spirit-nature  and  upon  the  strength  and  power  of  his  will, 
upon  his  yearning  love  for  his  followers,  and  for  his  great 
cause,  and  upon  the  susceptibility  of  his  disciples.  But  was 
it  necessary  ?  Had  he  in  reality  not  yet  finished  his  work  ? 
Yes,  his  work  was  finished,  and  yet  not  finished.  He  had 
nothing   to   add,  nothing  to  complete,  nothing  to  improve. 

*  Italics  mine.— G.  W.  L. 
6 


82 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


Therefore,  he  only  showed  himself,"  (the  reader  will  remember 
that  Paul  mentions  nothing  else  in  the  epistle)  "showed  that  he 
lived,  and  disappeared  again  without  giving  any  fresh  teaching, 
any  addition  to  his  teaching  or  to  his  commissions."  (Jesus  of 
Nazara,  vol.  6,  pp.  361-2-3.) 

This  is  enough.  When  this  most  elaborate,  and  not  by  any 
means  the  least  able  of  all  the  rationalistic  lives  of  Jesus,  ends 
with  this  "  most  lame  and  impotent  conclusion,"  what  more  can 
we  ask  ?  Involuntarily  we  exclaim :  "  Is  it  not  easier  to  accept 
the  account  of  the  witnesses,  just  as  it  has  come  down  to  us  ?" 
There  can  be  but  one  answer  to  this  question.  "  The  firm 
foundation  of  God  stands."  "  The  Lord  hath  risen  indeed," 
and  he  will  come  again.  "  Every  eye  shall  see  him,  and  they 
that  pierced  him !  "  Gladly  we  take  up  the  refrain  and  say : 
"Even  so,  Lord  Jesus,  come  quickly;"  and  yet  in  thine  own 
time ;  for  thou  alone  knowest,  and  we  can  trust  thee  ! 

DID  JESUS  CBEATE  A  NEW  EELIGIOm 

To  reach  what  many  regard  as  the  most  fundamental  ques- 
tion between  Christian  faith  and  modern  unbelief,  I  make  an 
extract  from  Dr.  Kuenen's  work  on  "  National  and  Universal 
Religions."  It  is  long,  but  it  offers  the  shortest  way  to  the 
point  before  us.    I  quote  as  follows  : 

"  The  limit  fixed  for  this  portion  of  our  investigation  is  now 
reached.  We  have  already  traced  through  its  course  the  ascent 
of  Judaism  towards  an  international  religion,  the  birth  of  which 
DOW  stands  before  our  eyes  as  a  historical  necessity.  Yet 
always,  let  me  say  it  again,  with  one  important  reservation. 
The  elements  lie  mingled  with  one  another,  and  '  Let  there  be 
light '  must  still  be  spoken.  But  is  not  this  equivalent  to  an 
avowal  that  our  whole  undertaking  has  failed  ?  No  doubt  it 
would  be,  if  I  had  promised  to  explain  the  origin  of  Christianity 
independently  of  the  person  of  its  founder.  But  you  will 
remember  that  at  the  outset  I  declared  I  could  do  nothing  of  the 


GROUNDS  ON  WEIGH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


83 


kind.  What  I  did  undertake  to  show  was  that  Jesus  ought  not 
to  be  regarded  as  the  '  deus  ex  macMna '  who  suddenly  ajDpears 
to  bring  order  out  of  the  confusion  and  misery  wrought  by  men, 
and  that  he  might  be  strictly  demonstrated  not  to  have  stood  in 
opposition  to  the  whole  Jewish  people  in  every  phase  and  shade 
of  its  religion.  Have  I  not  satisfied  these  promises  ?  '  Chris- 
tianity,' I  read  not  long  ago,  'the  person  of  Jesus  Christ,  is  not 
the  last  shoot  of  the  Israelitish  nationality,  but  the  completion 
of  the  revelation  of  God  which  underlies  its  history.'  I  say 
nothing  of  the  contrast,  for  it  would  bring  us  upon  a  field  we 
are  not  now  treading.  But  for  us  the  denial  here  made  has 
fallen  away.  Christianity  not  the  last  shoot  (or  rather  the 
fruit)  of  the  Israelitish  nationality  ?  But  have  we  not  seen  how 
more  than  one  of  the  components  of  Judaism  pointed  forward 
toward  the  things  which  should  be,  and,  as  it  were, forced  the 
development  of  that  germ  which  the  Israelitish  religion  had  for 
centuries,  nay,  from  the  very  beginning  borne  within  itself? 
Have  we  not  witnessed  '  the  birth-pains ' — not  the  imaginary 
but  the  real  ones  of  the  Messiah?' 

The  intelligent  reader  will  see  that  we  here  touch  the  bottom 
"  issue  "  between  Christianity  and  modern  Rationalism.  In  the 
historical  coflict  everything  hinges  on  the  resurrection  of  Jesus. 
In  the  field  of  scientific  explanation  everything  is  wrapped  up 
in  this  theory  of  natural  development.  The  reader  sees  how  it 
stands.  Our  whole  conception  of  the  supernatural,  in  the 
biblical  revelation  in  Christ,  in  redemption,  is  here  denied  out- 
right. The  religion  of  Israel  was  only  a  phase  of  development, 
like  Brahmanism,  Zoroastrianism,  and  all  the  rest.  Chris- 
tianity was  just  a  growth  out  of  Judaism,  as  was  Buddhism  out 
of  the  older  Brahmanism.  Like  all  the  rest,  it  can  be  fully 
explained  without  the  hypothesis  of  the  supernatural. 
Buddhism,  Islam,  Christianity  stand  upon  the  same  ground. 
The  explanation  of  one  is  the  explanation  of  all.  This  is  pre- 
cisely what  Kuenen  means.    Afiirming  distinctly  the  superiority 


♦Hibbarb  Lectures,  1882,  pp.  244-246. 


84 


GROUNDS  ON  WEIGH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


of  Christianity  over  Islam  and  Buddhism,  he  still  finds  no  dis- 
tinction as  to  origin.    I  must  state  briefly  his  method. 

(1)  Judaism  in  its  later  stages  appeared  under  several  dis- 
tinct forms.  Of  these  he  first  mentions  Essenism.  This  phase 
of  Judaic  life  was  not  due,  as  some  have  supposed,  to  a  foreign 
influence,  but  sprang  directly  out  of  native  tendencies.  It  was 
purely  a  Palestinian  development.  But  following  its  own  lines 
of  growth,  it  became  an  independent  movement,  dropped  away 
from  the  temple  service  and  the  ritual,  thus  renouncing  the  most 
central  conception  of  original  Judaism,  and  becoming  prac- 
tically an  unconnected  ofi'-shoot  from  the  older  cultus.  Such  a 
development  shows,  he  thinks,  that  Jewish  religious  life  was 
not  a  mere  crystallization  of  Rabbinical  traditions.  But  the 
Essenic  movement,  he  grants,  made  no  progress  toward  Chris- 
tianity, though  the  contrary  has  been  sometimes  maintained. 

(2)  Next  is  Pharisaism.  The  Sadducees,  he  rightly  tells  us, 
represented  no  principle.  The  Scribes  (Sopherim)  led  the 
thought  of  the  people,  and  the  Pharisees,  their  pupils,  sought  to 
put  their  theories  into  practice.  They  were  not  wholly  bad. 
They  represented  the  best  side  of  the  Judaism  of  that  day. 
Many  of  them  were  devout  seekers  after  righteousness ;  the 
righteousness  of  commandment  and  ritual.  There  was  an  ele- 
ment of  hypocrisy,  but  there  were  sincerity  and  genuineness,  too. 
The  teaching  of  the  Scribes  was  not  wholly  legalistic.  They 
gave  emphasis  to  the  heart.  Rabbi  Hillel  came  very  near  to 
the  golden  rule  of  Jesus.  His  formula  ran  thus  :  "  What  thou 
wouldst  not  have  done  to  thee,  do  not  that  to  others."  There 
were  not  only  conscientious  men  among  the  Scribes,  but  there 
were  also  men  of  talent  and  imagination.  Their  moral  teaching 
approached  that  of  the  gospel.  This  phase  of  Judaism  was  by 
no  means  a  mere  idolatry  of  lifeless  forms. 

Besides,  the  prophets  had  emphasized  the  importance  of 
right  dispositions,  as  a  condition  of  divine  acceptance,  and  it  is 
not  to  be  doubted  that  many  upheld  their  teaching.  Thus  it 
appears   that  Judaism   was  not  altogether  dead.    The  old 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


85 


vitality  still  lingered,  and  might  safely  be  counted  upon  for 
new  manifestations  under  new  and  favorable  conditions. 

(3)  There  was  Messiariism,  and  also  Proselytism.  In  these 
directions  there  was  great  activity.  The  former  manifested 
itself  in  two  forms.  Some  were  passively  but  hopefully  waiting. 
Others,  the  Zealots,  "  thought  the  day  of  deliverance  might  be 
hastened  by  heroic  deeds."  Josephus,  the  onl}^  witness  to  be 
consulted,  although  he  would  gladly  have  concealed  it,  "reveals 
the  constant  growth  of  Zealotism  until  it  swept  the  whole 
people  with  it  in  the  year  66,  A.  D.''  "But  the  passive  aspect 
had  a  far  higher  religious  significance."  "  It  means  something 
to  live  in  a  world  where  things  are  not  what  they  ought  to  be, 
and  to  stand  against  it  with  a  protest,  unuttered  indeed,  but  all 
the  more  earnest  and  deep  on  that  very  account."  As  to  Prose- 
lytism, Dr.  Kuenen  says,  that  "  great  numbers,  in  almost  every 
quarter  of  the  known  world,  had  actually  joined  the  Jews." 
The  movement  had  "  gradually  assumed  amazing  dimensions." 
"  It  is  not  necessary,"  he  says,  "  to  go  into  details  here.  It  is 
only  the  main  fact  that  has  any  interest  and  concerning  that 
there  is  no  dispute." 

But  the  most  striking  feature  in  this  movement,  he  tells  us, 
is  that  "the  question  of  tlie  conditions  under  which  the  heathen 
should  be  admitted  into  Judaism  had  already  been  asked  and 
variously  answered  !"  Josephus  tells  of  the  conversion  of  the 
royal  house  of  Adiabene  to  the  Jewish  religion,  and  of  the  doubt 
of  Izates  as  to  whether  he  ought  to  be  circumcised ;  and  also 
that  contradictory  opinions  had  been  given  by  Hananiah  and 
Eleazar.  The  former  said  that  the  observance  of  the  main 
points  of  the  law  would  do,  while  the  latter  insisted  on  submis- 
sion to  all  its  ordinances,  including  circumcision !  And  so  Dr. 
Kuenen  says :  "The  question  between  national  and  universal 
religion  had  already  been,  I  will  not  say  answered,  but  at  least 
asked,  out  there  on  the  banks  of  the  Tigris."  "This  subject 
forms,"  he  says,  "a  sort  of  commentary  on  the  epistle  to  the 
Galatians."    If  Eleazar  should  have  prevailed,  Judaism  must 


86 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


have  remained  the  religion  of  a  single  people.  Then  what  would 
have  become  of  the  universalism  of  the  prophets  ?  And  "what 
again  of  the  plastic  power  of  adaptation  which  Judaism  had  al- 
ready displayed  in  foreign  countries  ?" 

Compelled  to  condense  to  the  utmost,  I  have  put  this  "brief* 
largely  in  my  own  words,  making  only  the  direct  quotations 
with  the  proper  points.  I  must  now  desist.  The  reader,  no 
doubt,  sees  the  author's  aim.  "The  conditions  of  transition,'''' 
he  says,  "are  present."  The  materials  are  "collected  for  the 
new  edifice."  "The  problem  is  set;  only  the  solutionis  wanting." 
"The  elements  lie  mingled  one  with  another,  and  'Let  there  be 
light,'  must  still  be  spoken.*'  In  other  words,  as  Dr.  Kuenen 
tells  us  honestly,  while  he  has  not  proposed  to  explain  the  ori- 
gin of  Christianity  independently  of  the  person  of  its  founder,  he 
has  indeed  attempted  to  show  that  all  preliminary  evolutions 
had  taken  place,  the  conditions  necessary  to  a  great  forward 
movement  had  already  come  into  existence,  and  it  was  only 
needed  that  some  mighty  genius,  another  Zoroaster,  or  Guatama, 
or  Mohammed  should  appear  on  the  scene  to  bring  order  out  of 
this  elemental  chaos,  and  speak  into  existence  the  most  wonder- 
ful spiritual  revolution  of  all  the  ages !  This  genius  came  in  the 
person  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth.  It  might,  indeed,  have  come  in  an- 
other just  as  well,  but,  in  point  of  fact,  it  came  in  him.  Every- 
thing made  ready  for  him  by  the  progressive  evolutions  of  hu- 
manity, the  man  Jesus  was  adequate  to  the  task  which  remained 
to  be  accomplished  !  Here  was  one  of  the  world's  greatest  and 
most  original  teachers,  and  what  was  needed  ?  As  Dr.  Kuenen 
sees  it,  the  problem  is  fully  explained.  The  hypothesis,  as  the 
scientific  people  would  say,  of  a  supernatural  Christ  is  plainly 
unnecessary !  This  may  be  said  to  be  the  one  battle-ground  of 
our  time.    All  else  is  incidental  and  subordinate.'* 

As  defining  this  issue  still  more  clearly,  let  me  quote  from 
page  200,  as  follows  : 

"Before  all  things  let  me  declare  that  I  have  no  thought  of 

*The  reader  is  referred  to  Hibbard  Lectures  for  1882,  pp.  218-245. 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


87 


ignoring  the  person  of  Jesus,  or  lowering  its  high  significance. 
To  me,  too,  the  rise  of  Christianity  would  be  an  insoluble  riddle 
were  I  to  set  aside  him  who  for  eighteen  centuries  has  taken  rank 
as  its  founder.  Whence  he  sprang — from  Israel  or  from  God,  as 
it  is  sometimes,  but  I  think  very  incorrectly  put — we  need  not 
now  decide.  Our  opinions  on  this  subject  may  possibly  diverge 
widely.  But  I  may  rely  on  the  assent  of  all  in  declaring  that 
what  Jesus  founded  can  only  be  called  a  new  creation  in  a  very 
improper  sense  of  the  word.  'If  there  be  any  such  thing  as  cre- 
ation out  of  nothing,  then  it  is  the  incommunicable  prerogative 
of  the  Deity,  and  must  be  left  out  of  consideration  in  reviewing 
any  human  development.'  " 

I  begin  by  saying  that  this  statement  is  scarcely  candid. 
No  one  contends  that  Christianity  is  a  new  creation  in  a  sense 
which  disconnects  it  Avith  all  antecedent  history.  On  the  contra- 
ry, it  is  firmly  held  that  the  gospel  is  the  continuation  of  a  reve- 
lation running  from  the  very  dawn  of  man's  life  on  the  earth.  It 
is  the  culmination  of  a  process  which  had  been  advancing  for 
ages.  There  is,  indeed,  no  absolute  breach  with  the  past,  but 
the  introduction  of  a  new  and  divine  factor,  without  which, 
further  progress  towards  the  goal  of  God's  purpose  was  not  pos- 
sible. The  supernatural  had  been  a  factor  in  this  development 
from  the  beginning,  but  in  Jesus  it  assumed  a  yet  higher  form. 
God,  who  had  often  spoken  through  the  prophets,  now  conde- 
scended to  speak  through  his  Son.  The  future  in  the  case  is,  in 
a  certain  sense,  grounded  in  the  past,  but  it  transcends  it ;  is  no 
mere  natural  offshoot  from  it.  It  is  not  the  result  merely 
of  forces  pre-existing,  and  supplemented  by  another  remarkable 
human  life,  but  a  new  movement  whose  origin  can  only  be  ex- 
plained by  the  introduction  of  a  personality  higher  than  that 
which  is  highest  in  our  common  humanity.  Luther  is  the  suffi- 
cient explanation  of  Lutheranism,  no  doubt,  but  Jesus  is  the  ad- 
equate explanation  of  Christianity  only  when  we  see  in  him  the 
Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God.  Cliristianity  is  only  explained 
historically  by  showing  its  dependence  upon  the  person  of  a  su- 


88 


GBOUNDS  OX  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


perhuman  revealer  and  Savior.  Its  fundamental  and  distinctive 
ideas  and  aims  refuse  utterly  to  accord  with  any  other  pre-sup- 
position.  They  are  higher  than  the  most  highly  inspired  hu- 
manity in  their  origin. 

In  this  sense  "what  Jesus  founded"  is,  indeed,  a  new  creation. 
His  kingdom  is  no  borrowed  conception.  His  gospel  is  no  mere 
modification  or  enlargement  of  pre-existing  ideals,  whether  of 
prophet,  or  priest,  or  scribe.  The  kingdom  of  heaven  as  he 
preached  it  had  never  been  in  the  thought  of  prophet  or  sage. 
The  power  of  faith  in  a  great  divine  personality  (yet  manifest- 
ing itself  under  human  conditions)  to  lift  up  and  spiritualize  the 
life  of  the  world,  had  never,  before  Jesus,  dawned  upon  any  hu- 
man heart.  He  only  had  seen  in  his  day  what  wonderful  spir- 
itual achievements  are  "possible  to  him  that  believes."  He  saw 
how  in  the  presence  of  such  faith,  even  as  a  mustard  seed,  moun- 
tains of  difficulty  should  disappear,  and  the  deep-rooted  syca- 
mine tree  of  prejudice  and  bigotry  be  torn  up  and  cast  into  the 
sea.  No  one  before  him  ever  dreamed  of  such  wonderful  possibili- 
ties being  wrapped  up  in  the  simple  act  of  believing  in  a  divine 
Christ.  The  relation  of  Jesus  to  Christianity  is  not  that  of  other 
founders  of  religions  to  the  systems  founded  by  them.  Zoroas- 
ter, Confucius,  Sakyamuni,  Mohammed,  stand  outside  and  tell 
us  what  they  would  have  their  followers  believe  and  do.  They 
figure  only  in  the  role  of  teachers,  of  prophets,  if  one  chooses  to 
put  it  in  that  way.  Jesus  is  himself  the  very  substance,  essence, 
vitalizing  power  of  Christianity.  You  may  separate  others  in 
thought  from  the  religions  whose  origin  we  trace  to  them,  and, 
so  separated,  the  religions  stand  out  on  their  own  merits,  as 
ideals  of  faith  and  conduct.  You  cannot  separate  Jesus  from 
Christianity.  He  is  its  most  pervading  presence;  its  innermost 
life.  He  "died  for  our  sins;"  was  "raised  for  our  justification;" 
he  "lives  in  us;"  and,  in  turn,  we  "live  in  him."  He  is  our  "wis- 
dom, and  righteousness,  sanctification  and  redemption."  What 
Jesus  did,  and  still  does,  for  us,  even  more  than  what  he  taught, 
is  of  the  substance  of  Christianity.    Hence  our  faith  is  not  the 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS.  89 

"belief  of  doctrines,  but  belief  in  the  personal  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God.  It  is  not  the  intellectual  acceptance  of  a  teacher  which  is 
fulfilled  in  believing  the  things  taught  by  him,  but  faith  in  a  Sa- 
vior, a  Redeemer,  Mediator,  whose  ofliices  are  necessary  to  our 
salvation  both  here  and  hereafter.  No,  you  cannot  separate 
Christ  from  the  Gospel  which  the  apostles  preached  in  his  name. 
Take  him  out,  and  there  would  be  no  gospel  left.  You  can  sep- 
arate him  from  the  moral  truths  which  he  taught,  and  believe  in 
these  truths,  as  truths,  without  believing  in  Christ.  As  regards 
these  moral  truths,  his  relation  to  them  is  identical  with  that  of 
other  teachers  to  the  doctrines  taught  by  them.  But  Christianity 
is  much  more  than  a  body  of  moral  or  spiritual  truth.  And  it  is 
this  "much  more"  which  constitutes  the  very  core  of  the  gospel. 
It  is  redemption,  it  is  salvation  from  sin,  through  the  personal 
offices  of  its  Founder,  the  Christ.  It  is  this,  or  it  is  only  a  sys- 
tem of  doctrines,  like  the  rest,  but  better,  perhaps,  because  its 
spiritual  ideals  are  higher  and  truer  to  the  needs  of  our  human 
life. 

JESUS,  THE  CBEATOB  OF  A  NEW  BELIGION. 

But  is  it  true  that  "what  Jesus  founded  can  only  be  called  a 
creation  in  a  very  improper  sense  ?"  Let  us  look  this  affirma- 
tion boldly  in  the  face.  Nay,  we  must  not  refuse  to  face  it,  for 
it  is  the  heart  of  the  unbeliever's  contention.  If  he  is  right  here, 
he  is  right  when  he  says  he  only  needs  a  human  Christ  to  ex- 
plain the  origin  of  Christianity.  But  I  have  said  above  that 
Jesus  neither  eflfected  nor  sought  to  effect  an  absolute  severance 
from  the  historical  past  of  human  life.  The  religion  "founded 
by  Jesus"  confesses  its  dependence,  in  a  certain  way,  upon  the 
older  dispensation  of  lawgiver,  prophet  and  priest.  It,  indeed, 
freely  admits  its  inheritance  from  the  past  of  Israel's  history. 
It  claims  to  be  the  fulfillment  of  that  which  formerly  existed 
only  in  promise ;  the  fuller  development  of  germinant  concep- 
tions, heretofore  but  broadly  outlined,  and  vaguely  held,  in  hu- 


90 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


man  thought.  It  is  the  continuance  and  conclusion  of  a  revela- 
tion previously  begun.  But  do  these  admissions  destroy  its  cre- 
ative character  ?  Is  it  necessary  to  creation  that  the  existent 
shall  be  evoked  from  the  absolute  non-existent  ?  That  some- 
thing shall  be  made  from  nothing  ?  Must  we  have  a  creation 
absolute,  or  no  creation  at  all  ?  Dr.  Kuenen  must  mean  this,  or 
his  affirmation  has  no  significance  in  the  argument.  But  this  is 
what  we  deny.  We  concede  that  the  work  of  Jesus  was  ground- 
ed in  the  past,  but  maintain,  at  the  same  time,  its  creative  char- 
acter. Let  us  proceed  carefully.  Of  course,  that  which  Jesus 
carried  over  from  Judaism  into  the  new  order  which  he  estab- 
lished could  not  be  said  to  owe  its  existence  to  him.  In  so  far, 
then,  his  work  was  not  creative.  But  what  about  the  things  in 
Christianity  which  were  not  in  Judaism  ?  What  about  its  dis- 
tinctive and  differential  attributes,  of  which  Judaism  contained 
not  even  the  suggestion  ?  This  is  what  Jesus  created,  originated, 
founded.  I  go  back  again  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven  as  Jesus 
conceived  it.  The  thought  was,  and  is,  the  thought  of  Jesus  only. 
I  do  not  mean,  of  course,  that  the  vague  idea  that  there  was  to 
be  a  divine  kingdom  had  not  been  promulgated  before  the  time 
of  Jesus.  I  do  mean,  however,  that  the  kingdom,  as  Jesus  con- 
ceived it,  was  an  altogether  difierent  thing  from  what  any  one 
had  thought  of  before  him.  There  can  be  no  denial  here  that 
does  not  imply  misapprehension,  not  to  say  distortion,  of  the 
testimony, 

I  have  said,  and  I  hope  I  may  be  pardoned  if  I  repeat,  that 
no  one  ever  suggested  the  idea  of  a  purely  spiritual  kingdom,  a 
kingdom  in  the  souls  of  men,  until  Jesus  proclaimed  it.  So  like- 
wise his  doctrine  of  the  Messianic  office  and  work  was  original 
to  him.  If  there  were  germs  of  these  great  divine  ideas  in  the 
prophets,  they  were  so  dimly  and  inadequately  represented  that 
they  bore  slight  likeness  indeed  to  the  bold,  emphatic  utterances 
of  Jesus.  Whatever  he  took  from  the  older  revelations  to  Israel 
underwent  such  transfiguration  and  glorification  in  passing 
through  his  thought,  that  the  prophet  who  may  be  said  in  some 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


91 


shadowy  way  to  have  suggested  it  would  not  have  been  able  to 
see  in  the  formulas  of  Jesus  the  slightest  dependence  upon  any- 
thing he  had,  at  any  time,  thought  or  said.  So  far  as  Jesus  built 
upon  the  promises  and  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament,  he 
seized  only  the  kernel,  and  discarded  the  shell  which  inclosed  it. 
His  work  was  that  of  an  originator,  or  creator,  because  it  did  not 
take  up  and  appropriate  the  conceptions  of  any  one  who  had 
preceded  him.  All  former  ideals  fell  far  below  his  loftier  range 
of  thought  and  purpose.  Even  in  mere  morals,  where  the  near- 
est approach  to  him  had  been  effected,  there  was  yet  a  great  dis- 
tance to  be  traversed.  The  golden  rule  of  Hillel  and  that  of 
Jesus  furnish  an  example  in  point.  The  difference  between  a 
negative  and  positive  in  morals  is  a  difference  across  the  whole 
heavens.  "What  you  would  not  have  done  to  yourself,  do  not 
that  to  others,"  is  the  merest  shadow  of  the  positive  formula  of 
Jesus.  The  difference  between  "do  not  the  wrong  thing  to  an- 
other," and  "do  to  him  all  possible  right  things,"  is  just  the  dif- 
ference between  the  divine  and  the  human.  The  one  is  satisfied 
when  you  refrain  from  doing  actual  iniquity ;  the  other  will  not 
allow  you  to  stop  short  of  the  largest  possible  beneficence.  But 
in  the  circle  of  moral  truth  there  was  least  need  of  our  Lord's 
creative  power.  It  was  here  that  the  Judaic  legalism  bore  its 
richest  fruit.  It  was  along  this  pathway  that  "the  pedagogue 
was  leading  men  to  Christ,  that  they  might  be  justified  by 
faith."  The  law  could  give  the  knowledge  of  sin,  the  sense  of 
guilt;  but  it  could  not  give  the  consciousness  of  salvation.  This 
brings  us  back  again  to  the  position  taken  above,  that  what 
Jesus  did  for  us  is  yet  more  important  for  our  happiness  than 
what  he  taught  us  to  do  for  ourselves  ;  more  important  because 
more  entirely  above  the  plane  of  our  human  possibilities.  The 
notion  of  a  mere  human  Founder  of  Christianity  takes  Jesus  out- 
side of  the  interior  sphere  of  his  religion  and  places  him  in  a 
professor's  chair,  to  discharge  only  the  functions  of  a  teacher  of 
the  human  race !    The  difference  is  fundamental. 

Let  me  particularize.    Paul  says  :  "  Jesus  died  for  our  sins;" 


92 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


again,  lie  says :  "  "  In  Mm  we  liave  our  redemption,  the  forgive- 
ness of  our  sins."  John  says :  "  And  the  blood  of  Jesus,  his 
Son,  cleanseth  us  from  all  sin." 

Now  I  am  not  about  to  propound  a  theory  of  atonement,  I 
am  not  sure  enough  of  my  ground  to  attempt  the  task  otherwise 
than  provisionally,  even  if  this  were  the  place  for  such  an 
attempt,  and  clearly  it  is  not.  I  am  content  here  with  the  fact, 
the  unquestionable  fact,  that,  in  the  apostolical  gospel,  the 
death  of  Jesus,  the  blood  of  Jesus,  is  always  placed  at  the 
ground  of  the  ofler  of  the  forgiveness  of  sins.  The  primitive 
disciples  were  taught  to  regard  themselves  as  forgiven  and 
saved  through  the  death,  or  blood,  of  the  Lord  Messiah,  There 
is  positively  no  denying  this  fact,  however  one  may  try  to  mini- 
mize its  significance,  I  dismiss  all  theory,  and  build  on  the 
simple  fact. 

Again :  Our  Lord's  work  of  mediation  is  now  going  on.  It 
is  not  a  thing  accomplished,  once  for  all,  in  the  day  of  his 
humiliation.  Else,  why  are  we  taught  to  give  thanks  in  his 
name  ?  To  pray  in  his  name  ?  Why  are  we  said  to  "  receive 
remission  of  sins  through  his  name  ? "  But  his  kingdom  is  the 
kingdom  of  a  Mediator.  When  his  work,  as  Mediator,  shall 
have  been  completed,  it  is  said  :  "  He  will  deliver  up  the  king- 
dom to  God,  even  the  Father  .  .  that  God  may  be  all  in  all," 
This  Mediatorial  kingdom  is  the  kingdom  of  the  present  dispen- 
sation ;  his  work  as  Mediator  is  now  going  on,  and  must 
continue  to  go  on,  until  every  enemy  shall  have  been  abolished, 
or  put  under  his  feet. 

Once  more :  The  priesthood  of  Jesus,  also,  must  abide  till 
his  work  shall  have  been  accomplished.  "  Thou  art  a  priest 
forever,  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek,"  is  the  language  of  the 
divine  call.  But  Jesus  was  not  a  priest  while  on  earth.  His 
office  did  not  impinge  upon  that  of  the  Levitical  priesthood  at 
all.  "For  Christ  entered  not  into  a  holy  place  made  with 
hands,  like  in  pattern  to  the  true  ;  but  into  heaven  itself,  now  to 
appear  before  the  face  of  God  for  us."    Heaven  is  his  sane- 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


93 


tuary,  the  scene  of  liis  priesthood.  His  priestly  office  abides  of 
necessity  while  the  dispensation  of  favor  continues.  He  will 
exercise  his  priestly  functions,  until  the  work  of  redemption  is 
completed,  and  he  shall  come  to  gather  his  people  home. 

This,  then,  is  what  we  mean  when  we  say  that  Jesus  cannot 
be  separated  from  his  religion.  The  offices  of  Jesus  are  the 
religion.  Take  these  offices  away,  and  the  doctrine  may  be 
left,  but  the  religion  is  gone.  When  Jesus  is  lowered  to  the 
plane  of  mere  manhood,  however  exalted,  all  these  higher  func- 
tions must  be  eliminated  from  our  conception  of  Christianity. 
His  atonement,  his  mediation,  his  priesthood,  in  any  really 
significant  sense,  become  forever  impossible.  I  am  willing  to 
grant  that  some  of  these  terms  may  be  fairly  explained  as 
typical  or  metaphorical,  in  the  last  analysis,  but  then  they 
stand,  at  the  same  time,  for  enduring  realities.  The  offices  of  the 
Christ  which  they  are  employed  to  express  are  not  less  signifi- 
cant functions  in  the  economy  of  salvation  because  of  the 
metaphorical  element  in  some  of  the  terms  which  have  been 
employed  to  designate  them.  There  is  no  way  of  escape  from 
these  conclusions,  it  seems  to  me,  but  by  the  denial  of  the  entire 
ideal  of  redemption  developed  in  the  New  Testament.  In  New 
Testament  Christianity  it  is  certain  that  these  elements  are 
found. 

When  we  speak  of  Christianity,  then,  all  these  things  are 
included.  We  do  not  stop  with  the  teaching  of  Jesus,  however 
wonderful  and  all-embracing  that  may  be.  He  is  Redeemer, 
Savior,  Lord.  He  is  all  this  by  virtue  of  his  offices — all  his 
offices.    Not  one  of  them  must  be  left  out  of  the  account. 

This  Teacher,  Redeemer,  Lord,  is  the  only  begotten  Son  of 
God.  So  the  New  Testament  everywhere  declares  him,  and  so 
the  task  assigned  him  absolutely  requires  him  to  be. 

Now  the  conception  embodied  in  Christianity,  as  herein  set 
forth,  is  not  a  mere  human  product.  It  is  a  revelation  of  God, 
or  it  is  nothing.  It  stood  complete  only  in  the  thought  of  Jesus. 
Others,  taught  by  him,  inspired  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  exalted  to 


94 


OBOUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


tlieir  loftiest  possibilities  Iby  the  brightness  of  these  unspeaka- 
ble visions,  have  seen  and  felt  enough  to  be  able  to  draw  near 
to  him  in  glad,  holy  fellowship,  and  to  rejoice  in  the  hope  of 
eternal  life,  because  he  has  graciously  promised  it.  But  only 
Jesus  has  comprehended  the  whole  sweep  of  this  mighty  range 
of  infinite  things,  because  only  Jesus  is  the  Messiah  and  Son 
of  God.  He  only  has  so  far  transcended  our  human  limitations 
as  to  be  perfectly  at  home  in  the  deep  things  of  redeeming  and 
saving  love. 

It  is  a  false  view  of  inspiration  to  suppose  that  there  is  no 
limit  to  its  possibilities.  According  to  this  view,  God  could  just 
as  well  have  revealed  his  will  through  idiots,  if  it  had  so 
pleased  him,  as  through  men  of  sense.  I  put  it  in  this  strong 
way  that  the  absurdity  may  be  more  clearly  apparent.  There 
is,  of  course,  no  limitation,  as  to  knowledge,  with  God;  but 
there  is  limitation,  that  is,  inadequate  power  of  receptivity, 
from  different  causes,  on  the  human  side.  The  Messianic  reve- 
lations of  Jesus  transcend  such  limitations,  but  transcend  them 
solely  because  he  is  the  Son  of  God,  and  because,  as  such,  the 
fullness  of  the  Divinity  dwelt  in  him.  His  knowledge  in  the 
kingdom  of  the  Spirit  is  underived  and  absolute.  Less  than 
such  a  Christ  could  not  give  infinite  trust. 

But  the  religion  of  Jesus  meets  perfectly  the  spiritual  needs 
of  men,  thus  verifying  itself  as  divine,  and  attesting  its  founder 
to  be  the  Son  of  God.  I  single  out  for  use  here  two  points 
only : 

(1)  Christianity  brings  re-inforcement  to  man's  moral  nature. 
It  gives  added  power  to  all  that  is  highest  in  him,  and  syste- 
matically discourages  and  represses  that  whole  side  of  him 
through  which  come  temptation,  and  all  forms  of  evil  and  sin. 
The  consciousness  of  every  Christian  is  witness  here.  At  the 
bottom  of  all  his  highest  aspirations,  the  Christian  knows,  is 
the  word  of  God,  and  the  faith  in  Jesus.  That  Christianity 
makes  real  believers  better  men  and  women  is,  to  believers 
themselves,  a  fact  of  consciousness,  and  to  others,  an  undent- 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


95 


able  fact  of  observation.  That  there  are  spurious  professors  of 
Christianity  does  by  no  means  invalidate  this  statement.  The 
existence  of  counterfeits  may  make  us  more  watchful,  but  starts 
no  doubt  as  to  the  value  of  genuine  coin.  The  world  under  the 
reign  of  Christ  is  a  better  world  than  that  which  pagan  deities 
and  philosophies  made,  and  its  outlook  grows  brighter  every 
year.  The  measure  of  Christian  receptivity  is  the  only  limit  of 
progress  in  the  elements  of  true  and  noble  manhood,  through 
all  time  to  come. 

(2)  But  man  at  his  best,  man  under  Christ,  and  filled  with 
his  Holy  Spirit,  is  yet  a  child  of  earth,  liable  to  be  tempted  and 
to  fall  into  sin.  This  sad  fact  all  human  experience  attests. 
There  is  no  mistaking  it.  The  best  men,  therefore,  fall  short. 
Jesus  understood  this  perfectly.  He  knew  that  we  should  need 
his  mercy,  in  the  forgiveness  of  our  sins,  so  long  as  we  are  here 
in  the  flesh.  He  provided  for  this  need,  too.  He  tells  us  to 
come  to  him,  to  come  to  the  Father  through  him,  or  in  his  name ; 
to  confess  our  sins  and  to  receive  forgiveness.  These  provisions 
cover  the  whole  ground.  Christianity  creates  the  highest 
humanity,  but,  at  the  same  time,  it  provides  mercy  for  inevita- 
ble weakness,  this  side  the  resurrection  morn.  Over  there  we 
shall  sin  no  more.  Over  there  we  shall  realize  our  best  desires. 
We  are  made  meet  for  that  world  in  Christ,  through  whom  our 
shortcomings  find  forgiveness,  and  in  whom  our  highest  possi- 
bilities of  holy  living  are  attained.  Who  could  have  conceived 
of  such  a  redemption,  save  the  Son  of  God  ?  Granted  the  con- 
ception possible,  who  save  the  Son  of  God  could  have  achieved 
it  for  us  ?  Indeed  the  founder  of  our  religion  is  the  Christ,  the 
Son  of  the  living  God.  Why  hesitate  and  halt  here  at  the 
threshold  of  the  divine  kingdom  ?  All  things  are  possible  to 
him  that  can  believe.  "  If  weak  thy  faith,  why  choose  the 
harder  side  ? " 

As  we  approach  the  close  of  this  discussion,  let  us  consider 
for  a  moment  the  religious  nature  of  man.  We  must  say  that 
this  religious  nature  is  not  of  itself  equal  to  the  task  of  finding 


96 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


out  God.  To  know  God  requires  aid  from  heaven.  But  the 
religious  nature  is  the  condition  both  of  fellowship  with  God, 
and  of  revelation  from  God.  It  cannot,  unaided,  reach  the 
higher  spiritual  truth,  but  it  furnishes  a  ground  of  receptivity 
for  the  divine  communication  of  such  truth.  In  the  Biblical 
revelation,  God  has  employed  different  methods.  There  have 
been  Angelophanies,  Tlieophanies,  visions — doubtless  of  several 
kinds — and,  above  all,  the  personal  teaching  of  God's  Son.  Be- 
sides, and  indispensable,  there  have  been,  throughout  the 
revealing  ages,  the  continuing  agency  and  inspiration  of  God's 
Holy  Spirit.  This  last,  only,  is  inspiration  in  its  true  Biblical 
sense.  The  religious  nature  has  evermore  furnished  the  basis 
for  these  divine  communications.  But  Christianity  is  more  than 
a  mere  phase  of  the  manifestation  of  man's  religious  nature. 
Why,  otherwise,  should  Israel  alone,  of  all  the  peoples  on  earth, 
have  been  able  to  reach  the  fundamental  ideas  on  which  a  true 
and  world-wide  religion  could  be  grounded?  And  how  else, 
than  through  the  Son  of  God  could  the  impassable  gulf  between 
Judaism  and  Christianity  have  been  spanned  ?  Development  is 
a  great  reality,  but  it  has  its  limitations.  It  does  not  explain 
everything.  In  the  natural  world,  the  existence  of  matter  and 
force  is  a  pre-supposition  without  which  it  can  explain  nothing. 
But  how  came  matter  and  force  ?  Behind  these  conditions  of 
development,  Avhat,  or  who?  Then,  to  mere  development,  the 
chasm  between  the  living  and  non-living  is  an  impassable  one. 
God  alone  could  bridge  it.  So  in  the  great  movement  in  human 
thought  and  experience  which  culminated  in  Christianity,  de- 
velopment has,  no  doubt,  played  its  part,  but  that  part  has  ever 
been  a  subordinate  one.  There  have  been  here  also,  mighty 
chasms,  not  to  be  spanned,  save  by  the  power  of  the  infinite 
God.  Beneath  this  whole  wonderful  sweep  of  things  there  has 
been  ever  necessary  the  immanent  presence  of  the  Hol}^  Spirit, 
while  in  its  final,  and,  for  mere  human  agency,  its  most  impossi- 
ble stage,  was  imperatively  demanded  the  advent  and  agency  of 
God's  only  begotten  Son.    This  is  true  of  Christianity  consid- 


GROUNDS  ON  WHICH  WE  ACCEPT  JESUS. 


97 


ered  merely  as  a  revelation  of  truth,  but  vastly  more  true  when 
we  remember  that  it  is  a  provision  to  save  men  from  their  sins 
and  prepare  them  for  the  joys  of  heaven.  Redemption  demands 
more  than  a  teacher.  Here,  as  we  have  seen,  arises  the  necessity 
for  those  other  offices  of  Christ,  without  which  the  law  of  con- 
duct is  a  message  of  slight  significance  to  human  souls.  Of 
this  whole  wonderful  conception,  Jesus  is  Originator,  Founder, 
Creator.  To  be  this  it  was  necessary  that  he  should  be  the  Son 
of  the  living  God.  To  his  name,  as  God's  only-begotten  Son, 
be  praise  and  might,  and  glory  and  blessing,  forever  and  ever. 

7 


THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION,  OR 
SIN  AND  ITS  REMEDY. 


J.  S.  LAMAR. 
/.     THE  ENTBANCE  OF  Sm  INTO  THE  WOULD. 

IT  is  not  my  purpose  to  discuss  elaborately  the  doctrine  of 
original  sin.  While  it  fills  a  large  place  in  modern  theological 
systems,  in  the  beginning  it  was  quite  subordinate.  Previous  to 
the  time  of  Pelagius  and  St.  Augustine  no  special  prominence 
had  been  given  to  the  subject  of  Adam's  sin  and  its  conse- 
quences ;  and  such  views  as  were  held  and  taught  by  different 
fathers,  were,  as  compared  with  later  developments,  immature 
and  indefinite.  It  is  certainly  a  significant  fact  that  the  gospel 
was  originally  preached  with  power  and  success  ;  that  churches 
were  established,  educated  and  edified ;  and  that  Christianity 
became  triumphant  throughout  the  world  before  any  view  of 
original  sin  had  been  generally  accepted,  or  any  doctrine  re- 
specting it  had  been  fonnulated  and  imposed.  While  Origen 
in  the  East  taught  the  freedom  of  the  human  will  and  man's  con- 
sequent responsibility,  Tertullian  and  Hilary  in  the  West  em- 
phasized the  soul's  dependence  upon  grace ;  and  these  two  doc- 
trines, coalescing  in  the  consciousness  of  the  church,  were  both 
received  and  enjoyed  as  the  harmony  of  truth. 

But  with  the  coming  of  Augustine  and  Pelagius  in  the  early 
part  of  the  fifth  century,  bringing  doctrines  sharply  defined  and 
pointedly  antagonistic,  discords  were  introduced,  the  jar  and 
jangle  of  which  have  afflicted  the  ears  of  the  church  for  nearly 
fifteen  hundred  years.  The  one  taught  that  the  guilt  of  Adam's 
sin  was  transmitted  to  his  posterity ;  that  man  is  free  only  to 
sin — only  to  resist  grace  ;  that  he  comes  into  being  spiritually 


.).  S.  LAMAi; 


James  S.  Lamar  was  born  in  the  State  of  Georgia,  May  18,  1829.  The 
place  in  Georgia  wiiifli  was  lionored  by  being  liis  birthplace  lie  does  not 
tinnk  it  worth  while  to  mention  in  the  few  facts  which  he  furnished  us  at 
our  request.  Kor  does  he  gi\  e  us  any  inforniatioa  concerning  his  early  life, 
not  deeuiing  it  a  matter  of  any  interest  to  the  readers  of  this  volume — a  mis- 
take resulting  from  his  extreme  modesty,  or  self-depreciation.  He  writes : 
"I  was  born  in  Georgia,  May  18,  1829,  and  through  the  mercy  of  God  I  am 
here  still,  and  that  is  about  all  there  is  of  it.""  He  graduated  in  Bethany 
College  in  1854,  and  soon  thereafter  accepted  the  pastorate  of  the  Church  in 
Augusta,  Ga.,  which  he  held  until  1874,  a  period  of  twenty  years.  After 
this  he  located  with  the  Fourth  and  "Walnut  Street  Church  in  Louisville,  Ky., 
Avhere  he  remained  one  j^ear,  returning  at  the  end  of  this  time  to  Augusta. 
After  a  few  years  in  liis  old  field  of  labor,  he  made  his  residence  in  Atlanta 
for  awhile,  and  tJien  located  at  Yaldosta,  in  same  State,  where  he  remained 
until  the  past  year,  Avhen  he  returned  to  his  first  love,  and  is  once  more  a 
citizen  of  Augusta.  He  has  settled  down  in  one  of  its  suburbs — Grovetown 
— and,  like  Carlyle  at  Craigenputtoch,  is  trying  to  "cultivate  literature  on  a 
little  oatmeal." 

His  work  as  a  minister  of  the  Gospel  has  been  interspersed  throughout 
with  numerous  contributions  to  our  periodical  literature,  which  have  always 
been  highly  prized  by  liis  readers.  Besides  these  fugitive  articles,  he  is  the 
autiior  of  the  "Organou  of  Scriptui-e,"  and  a  Commentary  on  the  Gospel  of 
Luke,  not  to  mention  some  smaller  works  which  have  had  a  wide  circula- 
tion. These  articles  and  volumes  have  established  his  reputation  as  a  writer 
of  marked  originality  of  thought,  lucidity  of  statement,  and  graceful  style. 
At  prc-cnt  he  is  a  regular  contributor  to  the  Cliri.stian  Si<iiid<(rd.  In  a 
brief  mile  to  the  editor,  responding  to  a  request  for  some  of  the  leading  facts 
of  his  life,  he  makes  the  following  characteristic  statement,  which,  better 
than  any  words  of  our  own,  express  a  marked  feature  of  his  character: 
"  Such,"'  lie  says,  "  are  the  main  tacts  of  a  life  which  has  nothing  in  it  extra- 
ordinary or  '  biographical.'  A  genius  might  make  something  out  of  it,  but  I 
tell  you  frankly  I  cannot.  If,  however,  you  feel  disposed,  .  .  you  may 
intimate  that  during  all  tliese  many  years  I  have  been  leading  a  sort  of 
f-fumbling  Christian  life;  and  I  should  be  glad  if  you  would  add,  as  the  one 
little  jewel  in  this  large  setting,  that  more  and  more,  as  my  sun  goes  down, 
I  love  my  brethren  and  my  fellow-men."  If  it  were  our  purpose  in  these 
brief  sketches  to  do  more  than  furnish  a  few  leading  facts  in  the  lives  of  our 
writers,  it  would  not  be  dittii  ult  for  us  to  find  in  the  life  and  character  of  the 
subject  of  this  sketch  much  to  commend  to  our  readers. 


THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  FiALVATION.  99 

dead  and  utterly  corrupt ;  and  that  he  can  be  saved  only  by  om- 
nipotent and  irresistible  grace.  The  other,  that  Adam's  sin  in- 
jured only  himself,  and  that  man  is  not  dependent  upon  super- 
natural grace  for  salvation.  Manifestly  there  was  no  nexus  that 
could  bind  these  two  systems  into  one.  They  were  not  opposite 
polarities  of  one  common  truth,  but  were  essentially  distinct, 
and  fundamentally  antagonistic. 

But  while  each  of  these  extremes  of  doctrine  fails  to  satisfy 
the  demands  of  modern  intelligence  ;  and  while  each  in  its  own 
way  may  be  felt  to  be  dishonoring  to  God  and  unfriendly  to 
man's  highest  interest,  it  is  not  easy,  and  it  may  be  impossible, 
to  formulate  any  statement  upon  a  subject  so  recondite  and  diffi- 
cult that  will  not  itself  be  open  to  serious  objections. 

What  is  desiderated,  it  seems  to  me,  is  a  full  and  complete 
recognition  and  appreciation  of  the  doctrine  of  Scripture  regard- 
ing the  fall  and  its  consequences,  but  at  the  same  time  viewing 
that  doctrine  in  the  light  of  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ 
Jesus,  with  its  consequences.  I  believe  that  by  contemplating 
the  first  and  second  Adam  together,  as  if  in  a  sort  of  dissolving 
view,  the  difficulties  that  have  been  thought  to  encompass  the 
subject  v/ill  be  much  relieved,  and  the  whole  matter  greatly 
simplified. 

It  will  readily  be  seen  that  we  must  first  of  all  seek  to  under- 
stand the  language  of  the  apostle — Rom.  5:  12.  "Therefore,  as 
through  one  man  sin  entered  into  the  world,  and  death  through 
sin;  and  so  death  passed  upon  all  men,  for  that  all  sinned.*' 
Whatever  may  be  regarded  as  doubtful  in  the  consideration  of 
this  text,  it  certainly  teaches  the  co-extensiveness  of  sin  and 
death — that  the  latter  reaches  exactly  as  far  as  the  former,  and 
no  farther.  Hence,  although  the  term  "world,"  if  standing 
alone,  might  and  would  have  a  more  inclusive  signification,  it  is 
expressly  limited  here,  by  the  terms  mo.n  and  men^  to  the  hu- 
man world,  and  so  the  death  spoken  of  is  only  the  death  of  the 
human  race — a  death  that  "passed  unto  all  men.''''  Some  theo- 
logians have  held  that  by  the  sin  of  Adam  death  was  introduced 


100  THE  GBOUXD  OF  MAX\S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 

also  into  the  animal  creation.  The  text,  however,  properly  in- 
terpreted, gives  no  support  to  this  view,  Avhile  the  testimony  of 
the  rocks  is  conclusive  against  it.  Infinite  numbers  of  animals 
had  lived  and  died  upon  the  earth  before  man  was  created. 

But  after  restricting  the  application  of  the  word  death  to  the 
human  race,  we  have  still  to  consider  the  question,  what  is  the 
meaning  of  this  word  as  used  in  the  passage  before  us  ?  This  is 
an  important  inquiry,  and  one  to  which  different  answers  have 
been  given,  each  of  which  is  more  or  less  plausible. 

Dean  Alford  says  that  it  is  "primarily  physical,  but  not  only 
physical  death  ;  as  sin,  so  death,  is  general,  including  the  lesser 
in  the  greater,  that  is,  spiritual  and  eternal  death." 

Lange,  on  Gen.  3:  17,  teaches  that  the  moral  death  was  pri- 
mary, but  that  it  was  causative  of  physical  death.  Mr.  Lard, 
in  his  commentary  on  Romans,  argues  that  the  word  here  means 
physical  death  alone ;  that  while  it  may  imply  much  more,  it 
expresses  only  ordinary  death. 

For  myself  I  am  clearly  of  the  opinion  that  it  means  spirit- 
ual death  alone.  It  seems  to  me  that  the  whole  course  and  his- 
tory of  the  pre-existent  animal  kingdom  furnish  a  powerful  pre- 
sumption, to  say  the  least,  in  favor  of  the  hj-pothesis  that  man 
was  originally  created  mortal.  It  is  true  that  in  his  higher  na- 
ture, as  a  moral  and  spiritual  being,  he  was  separated  from  the 
rest  of  the  animal  creation  by  a  gap  which  no  materialist  has 
been  able  to  bridge  ;  at  the  same  time  in  his  physical  or  animal 
nature,  he  was  in  substance  and  function  identified  with  his 
predecessors.  "As  an  animal,"  says  Le  Conte,  "man  forms  a 
most  insignificant  part  of  creation.  He  has  no  kingdom — ^he 
belongs  to  the  animal  kingdom  ;  no  department — he  belongs  to 
the  vertebrata ;  no  class — he  belongs  to  the  mammalia  ;  no  order 
— he  belongs  to  the  primates,  along  with  monkeys,  apes,  etc." 
I  may  add  that,  as  an  animal,  made  of  flesh  and  blood  and 
bones,  he  required  before  he  sinned  as  well  as  afterwards,  to  be 
supported  by  food.  (See  Gen.  1:  29).  This  cannot  imply  less 
than  that  his  body  was  subject  to  waste  of  tissue  and  cell,  to 


TEE  0 ROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 


101 


disorder  and  disease,  to  enfeeblement  and  decrepitude — and 
why  not  to  death  I  "For  that  which  befalleth  the  sons  of  men 
befalleth  beasts ;  even  one  thing  befalleth  them  ;  as  the  one 
dietli,  so  dieth  the  other ;  yea,  they  have  all  one  breath ;  so  that 
a  man  hath  no  pre-eminence  above  a  beast,  for  all  is  vanity. 
All  go  to  one  place  ;  all  are  of  the  dust,  and  turn  to  dust  again." 
(Ec.  3:  19,  20.) 

So  obvious  is  this  conclusion,  so  in  harmony  with  physiology 
and  Avith  all  we  know  of  animated  nature,  that,  but  for  the  texts 
which  have  been  (erroneously,  as  I  think)  supposed  to  teach  it, 
the  doctrine  of  animal  undyingness — if  I  may  use  such  a  word — 
would  never  have  been  taught  or  received.  All  would  have  per- 
ceived that  as  it  is  impossible  for  flesh  and  blood  to  inherit  the 
everlasting  kingdom  of  God  under  the  second  Adam,  it  was  never 
contemplated  under  the  first. 

But  let  us  look  a  little  more  closely  at  the  meaning  of  the 
word  death.  It  is  obvious  to  remark  that  both  in  the  Scriptures 
and  in  current  usage,  the  term  commonly  signifies  physical  dis- 
solution, but  I  do  not  remember  that  it  is  ever,  in  a  single  in- 
stance, employed  by  the  apostle  in  this  sense  when  used  by  him 
to  portray  the  consequences  of  sin.  As  examples  of  his  usus 
loquendi  we  read:  "The  wages  of  sin  is  death."  "And  the 
commandment  which  was  ordained  to  life  I  found  to  be  unto 
death."  "To  be  carnally  minded  is  death."  "For  if  ye  live 
after  the  flesh  ye  shall  die."  This  last  is  almost  literally  a  re- 
production of  the  language  addressed  to  Adam — "Thou  shalt 
surely  die,"  As  with  that,  too,  there  is  no  intimation  either  in 
text  or  context  that  the  word  is  used  in  any  extraordinary  sense. 
The  meaning  is  made  evident  by  the  nature  of  the  case  and  the 
subject  matter.  We  know  that  Paul  meant  spiritual  death,  be- 
cause we  know  that  the  believers  in  Rome  would  die  a  physical 
death  in  any  case,  whether  they  lived  after  the  flesh  or  after  the 
Spirit. 

It  may,  however,  occur  to  the  reader  that  the  apostle's  argu- 
ment in  1  Cor.  15,  is  manifestly  based  upon  physical  death : 


102  TEE  G BOUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 

"As  in  Adam  all  die,  even  so  in  Christ  shall  all  be  made  alive.'* 
This  is  certainly  true,  and  the  reference  is  beyond  all  doubt  to 
natural  death.  But  it  should  be  noted  that  in  this  most  instruc- 
tive Scripture,  death  is  not  attributed  to  Adam's  sin,  but  to  his 
nature;  he  "is  of  the  earth  earthy" — he  is  a  "living  soul" — a 
"natural  body  " — and  we  may  reverently  believe  that  he  returns 
to  the  dust  because  he  was  taken  out  of  it.  In  like  mannerjf 
we  look  closely  at  the  language  in  Genesis,  we  find  that  the 
penalty  of  the  sin  was  not  identical  with  returning  to  the  dust. 
The  curse  of  the  ground,  the  thorns  and  thistles,  the  sweat  and 
sorrow  were  penal  and  were  to  continue  as  long  as  he  lived ;  "  in 
sorrow  slialt  thou  eat  of  it  all  the  days  of  thy  life ;  in  the  sweat 
of  thy  face  shalt  thou  eat  bread  till  thou  return  to  the  ground." 
And  then  the  reason  is  given  why  the  man  must  expect  to  return 
to  the  ground ;  "  for  out  of  it  wast  thou  taken ;  for  dust  thou  art 
and  unto  dust  shalt  thou  return."  Gen.  3 :  17-19.  He  was  taken 
out  of  the  dust  before  he  sinned ;  he  was  dust  before  he  sinned — 
and  this  language  may  simply  intimate  that  in  view  of  this  fact, 
even  without  sin,  he  would  have  had  to  return  to  it. 

I  have  dwelt  at  some  length  upon  this  subordinate  point,  for 
two  reasons  :  1.  Because  I  deemed  it  important  to  show  that  in 
a  matter  in  which  the  teaching  of  natural  science  is  so  clear  and 
conclusive,  the  obvious  interpretation  of  the  Bible  is  in  perfect 
harmony  with  it ;  and  2,  Because  I  wished  in  this  way  to  give 
deeper  emphasis  to  the  meaning  of  death — to  show  that  whether 
in  Eden  or  in  Rome,  to  live  after  the  flesh  is  sin,  and  the  wages 
of  sin,  i.  e.,  its  natural  result,  its  normal  efiect,  its  inevitable 
consequence,  is  death — death  in  the  profoundest,  truest,  most 
solemn  significance  of  the  term. 

That  such  is  the  apostle's  meaning  of  the  word  in  the  pas- 
sage under  review,  is  yet  further  evidenced  by  the  entire  scope 
of  his  argument.  He  represents  the  first  man  as  the  head  and 
embodiment  of  the  human  race — all  humanity  being  in  him. 
His  sin,  therefore,  was  the  sin  of  all,  and  his  death  the  death  of 
all ;  and  so  "  death  passed  unto  all  men,  for  that  all  sinned." 


THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION.  103 

This  is  even  more  plainly  brouglit  out  in  the  context:  "For  if 
by  the  trespass  of  the  one  the  many  died,"  etc.,  (verse  15).  It 
will  be  observed  that  the  apostle  does  not  say  that  what  hap- 
pened to  Adam  as  a  consequence  of  his  sin  shall  happen  to  the 
many  (which  must  have  been  said  had  the  reference  been  to 
physical  death),  but  that  it  did  happen ;  it  is  a  definite  past — 
"  the  many  died."  As,  therefore,  this  could  not  have  been,  in 
the  case  of  the  many,  i.  e.  all  mankind,  a  j)hysical  death,  and  as 
all  including  Adam,  died  the  same  death,  we  are  constrained  to 
conclude  that  it  must  have  been  a  spiritual  death. 

I  am  aware  that  it  has  been  urged  with  insistence  that  what 
the  apostle  designed  to  teach  was  that  the  many  became  mor- 
tal— that  the  seed  of  decay  and  dissolution  was  implanted  in 
them,  which  was  to  germinate  and  grow,  and  finally  to  produce 
the  harvest  of  death.  This  is  conceivable,  certainly,  but  is  it 
so  taught  ?  Is  it  this  that  the  apostle  says  took  place  ?  I  per- 
ceive no  such  doctrine  in  his  language,  nor  yet  in  that  used  in 
Genesis  :  "  In  the  day  that  thou  eatest  thereof,  thou  shalt  surely 
die."  And  with  my  understanding  of  the  Scripture  I  believe 
that  he  died  on  that  very  day,  nay,  in  that  very  moment.  I 
believe  so  because  spiritual  life  is  a  life  which  flows  into  the 
soul  from  God,  and  which  is  maintained  and  preserved  just  so 
long  as  the  soul  abides  in  union  and  communion  with  him.  On 
the  other  hand  sin — not  all  sin,  for  there  is  a  sin  not  unto  death, 
a  sin  of  infirmity,  of  frailty,  of  ignorance — but  willful,  deliber- 
ate, known  sin,  involving  a  conscious  rejection  of  God,  and 
hard  hearted  rebellion  against  him — such  sin  breaks  the  union 
between  God  and  the  sinner,  and  cuts  off  the  soul  from  the  very 
source  of  its  life.  And  this  is  death — real  death.  Death  as 
God  sees  it.  Death  as  God  threatened  it.  Death  of  which  the 
separation  of  soul  and  body  is  but  the  faintest  shadow.  And 
this  death,  the  saddest  and  most  awful  of  human  calamities,  is 
not  a  penalty  inflicted  upon  the  sinner  ah  extra,  but  a  necessary 
and  inevitable  consequence,  resulting  from  the  absolute  depend- 
ence of  the  soul  upon  God  for  its  life. 


104  THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 

Sucli  was  the  sin  of  Adam — a  fearful  crime  committed  in  the 
face  of  solemn  and  gracious  warning,  and  against  the  clearest 
light  of  immediate  divine  revelation.  At  the  time  of  this  sin  he 
was  man — he  was  humanity — he  was  all  there  was  of  it.  Con- 
sequently when  he  sinned  and  died,  all  sinned  and  died — and  so 
the  human  race  was  dead — dead  in  trespasses  and  sins.  It  was 
no  mere  physical  nor  intellectual  calamity,  but  the  very  soul 
had  lost  its  all.  God  had  been  cast  out  of  humanity's  sanctum 
sanctorum,  and  Satan  enthroned  in  his  place.  Sin  had  entered 
into  the  world  and  death  through  sin,  and  so  death  passed  unto 
all  men,  for  that  all  sinned. 

//.    THE  BANISHMENT  OF  SIN  FROM  THE  WORLD. 

"We  may  imagine  what  the  condition  of  humanity  would 
have  been  if  it  had  been  abandoned  to  its  fate.  It  was  dead, 
morally  and  spiritually  dead.  It  was  corrupt  and  guilty,  god- 
less and  hopeless.  We  are  accustomed  to  speak  of  the  sin  of 
Adam  as  the  "fall"  of  man — a  word  which  carries  the  sugges- 
tion of  misfortune  or  accident  rather  than  of  criminality ;  and 
we  are  apt  to  associate  it  with  some  conception  of  frailty  or 
infirmity,  and  so  to  mingle  pity  with  our  somewhat  faint  con- 
demnation. We  think  of  our  first  father  as  the  victim  of  cir- 
cumstance. Of  course  what  he  did  was  wrong,  but — and  we 
are  sensible  of  an  unexpressed  and  indeterminate,  but  still 
positive  qualification.  From  our  standing-point  of  accumulated 
knowledge  and  large  experience,  we  look  back  upon  him  as  a 
child,  and  we  make  great  allowance  ,for  him.  We  are  not 
always  sensible  of  doing  this ;  we  would  hardly  admit,  perhaps, 
that  we  do  do  it,  but  to  a  great  extent  we  feel  so,  nevertheless. 

But  in  sober  truth  it  was  the  darkest  and  most  daring  of 
sins.  He  was  a  strong  man  and  not  a  child.  He  enjoyed  unin- 
terrupted communion  with  God ;  his  very  soul  was  open  to  the 
light  of  heaven.  He  understood  perfectly  what  God  required, 
and  with  daring  impiety  he  determined  to  cast  off  the  divine 


TEE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION.  105 

authority  and  to  be  his  own  God.  If  now  we  think  of  him  as 
an  abandoned,  desperate,  hardened,  polluted,  guilty  rebel 
against  God — "wholly  inclined  to  all  evil,  and  wholly  disin- 
clined to  all  good,  totally  depraved  and  corrupt  in  every  faculty 
and  part  of  his  soul  and  body  " — we  shall  have  something  like 
an  adequate  conception  of  his  moral  and  spiritual  condition, 
and  be  able  to  realize,  in  some  measure  at  least,  what  it  is  to  be 
dead  to  God  and  holiness — dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins.  And 
if  he  had  been  left  in  this  condition,  while  his  personal  guilt 
might  not  have  been  transmitted  to  his  descendants,  the  awful 
pollution  of  such  a  nature,  whether  by  heredity  or  association, 
or  both  combined,  would  inevitably  have  been  felt  throughout 
all  generations. 

But  by  the  grace  of  God  he  and  they  were  rescued  from  this 
death.  Man's  sin  was  no  surprise  to  his  Creator.  He  had  fore- 
seen it  before  the  heavens  were  brought  forth,  or  ever  the  earth 
was,  and  by  anticipation  had  provided  for  it.  The  second 
Adam  appears,  like  the  first,  the  representative  and  embodi- 
ment of  the  race,  to  take  away  "  the  sin  of  the  world,"  i.  e.,  of 
the  whole  human  family,  the  sin  which  they  sinned  in  Adam. 

Now  the  doctrine  of  the  apostle  is,  unless  I  have  entirely 
mistaken  the  force  of  language  which  appears  to  me  to  be 
singularly  free  from  ambiguity  and  difficulty,  that  Jesus  Christ 
actually  accomplished  this  work,  that  is  to  say,  that  he  posi- 
tively took  away  the  sin  of  the  world,  and  restored  the  dead 
human  race  to  spiritual  life.  I  do  not  pause  to  inquire  what 
bearing  this  declaration  may  have  upon  any  system  of  theology, 
I  am  simply  concerned  about  its  truth.  Is  it  so  ?  May  we  rely 
upon  it  and  rest  in  it  as  a  sure  and  settled  conclusion  ?  As  it  is 
purely  a  biblical  question,  let  us  read :  "  Therefore  as  by  the 
oflfense  of  one  judgment  came  upon  all  men  to  condemnation ; 
even  so  by  the  righteousness  of  one  the  free  gift  came  upon  all 
men  unto  justification  of  life."  Rom.  5:  18.  Just  as  certainly, 
therefore,  as  all  died  in  Adam,  and  in  whatever  sense,  so  cer- 
tainly and  in  a  corresponding  sense,  all  were  made  alive  in 


106  THE  G BOUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 

Christ.  And  let  it  be  noticed  that  this  is  a  finished  transac- 
tion, a  completed  event,  and  that  it  is  entirely  independent  of 
any  human  condition.  Note  furthermore,  that  this  gift  was 
bestowed  upon  'all  men."  We  cannot  avoid  the  conclusion, 
even  if  we  should  be  so  unwise  and  ungrateful  as  to  seek  to 
escape  it^  that,  as  Adam  was  a  man,  and  as  this  free  gift  came 
upon  all  men,  it  must  have  come  upon  him  unto  justification  of 
life.  In  other  words,  the  spiritual  life  which  he  had  lost  by  his 
sin  was  restored  to  him  through  the  obedience  of  Christ ;  and 
from  the  very  definition  of  such  life,  or  rather  from  the  neces- 
sary conception  of  it,  this  means  that  he  was  brought  again  into 
union  and  fellowship  with  God.  And  now  is  it  too  much  to  say 
— in  the  light  of  the  above  Scripture  is  there  any  mistalie  in 
saying — that  it  was  in  this  state  and  condition,  alive,  justified, 
righteous,  clean,  in  communion  with  God,  and  not  as  dead, 
corrupt  and  guilty,  that  he  "  begot  a  son  in  his  own  likeness, 
after  his  image  ?  " 

I  am  aware  that  to  minds  tinctured  by  prepossession  this 
conclusion  will  be  startling.  And  yet  the  dictum  of  the  Apos- 
tle is  remarkably  clear,  explicit  and  pointed.  His  doctrine  is 
brought  out  by  no  indirection  or  casual  inference,  but  by  mani- 
fest design.  He  seems  to  labor  to  give  it  emphasis,  as  if  he 
rejoiced  and  gloried  in  it  as  a  precious  truth,  as  if  he  exulted  in 
the  fact  that  the  obedience  of  Christ  efifectually  and  completely 
overcame  the  disobedience  of  Adam,  together  with  all  the  con- 
sequences of  that  disobedience.  And  yet  theology,  over-look- 
ing, or  at  any  rate  underestimating,  the  influence  of  the  perfect 
obedience  and  righteousness  of  the  second  Adam,  fixes  its  gaze 
upon  the  disobedience  of  the  first,  and  finds  in  that  the  funda- 
mental postulate  of  its  doctrinal  system.  Paul,  on  the  other 
hand,  is  seeking  only  to  exalt  Christ  and  to  magnify  his  work. 
To  do  so  he  paints  in  colors  of  awful  darkness,  not  what 
humanity  is,  but  what  it  would  have  been  if  Christ  had  not 
come.  Theology  paints  the  same  picture,  with  additions  of 
gloomy  horror  ad  libitum.,  seeming  to  esteem  it  a  merit  to  make 


THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION.  107 

the  case  as  bad  against  our  unfortunate  race  as  possible — 
declaring  that  we  are  dead  now,  and  guilty  of  Adam's  sin,  that 
we  are  totally  depraved  and  corrupt  in  every  faculty  and  part 
of  soul  and  body  now,  and,  having  completed  the  ghastly  pic- 
ture, it  frames  it  and  hangs  it  up  by  itself  as  a  work  of  art 
complete  and  masterly.  I  am  pleased  to  record  that  theology 
also  draws  a  portrait  of  Christ,  in  which  he  is  exhibited  in  his 
blessed  work,  but  it  hangs  this  picture  in  a  different  part  of  the 
gallery.  There  are  the  two  pictures.  We  may  look  first  upon 
one  and  then  upon  the  other,  but  they  are  kept  separate  and 
distinct. 

How  differently  does  the  apostle  paint !  He  makes  no  pic- 
ture of  the  sin  and  death  of  Adam,  and  yet  he  puts  them  on  the 
canvas  in  gloom  and  blackness,  puts  them  there,  not  as  the 
picture,  not  even  to  be  looked  upon  per  se,  but  as  the  shading 
and  background  to  bring  out  in  bold  relief  and  in  glorious  sym- 
metry and  beauty  the  divine  image  of  the  Son  of  God !  As  we 
gaze  upon  it  we  do  not  shudder  with  dread,  but  are  gladdened 
with  faith  and  hoj^e,  and  our  hearts  are  filled  with  worship  and 
love.  The  difference  between  Adam  out  of  Christ  and  Adam  in 
Christ  is  infinite  ;  but  theology,  blinded  by  the  mists  of  trans- 
mitted guilt  and  hereditary  corruption,  cannot  see  it ;  and  never 
can  it  correct  itself  and  come  into  harmony  with  the  Bible, 
until  Christ,  and  not  Adam,  be  made  the  alpha  of  the  system 
as  he  is  of  the  gospel. 

Before  dismissing  the  subject  I  must  briefly  consider  two  or 
three  other  Scriptures  bearing  upon  it.  And  first  the  declara- 
tion of  the  apostle  that  we  "  were  by  nature  the  children  of 
wrath."  Ep.  2:3.  "  The  passage,"  says  Barnes,  "  does  not 
aflirm  when  they  began  to  be  such,  or  that  they  were  such  as 
soon  as  they  were  born,  or  that  they  were  such  before  they 
became  moral  agents,  or  that  they  became  such  in  virtue  of 
their  connection  with  Adam — whatever  may  be  the  truth  on 
these  points;  but  it  affirms  that  before  they  were  renewed  they 
were  the  children  of  wrath."    That  the  apostle  did  not  believe 


108  THE  GUOUXD  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 

that  as  individuals  we  were  actually  born  "  children  of  wrath," 
will  appear  by  comparing  this  text  with  Rom.  7  :  9 — "  For  I 
was  alive  without  the  law  once ;  but  when  the  commandment 
came,  sin  revived,  and  I  died."  From  this  Scripture  w  ^  feel 
constrained  to  allow  that  at  one  period  in  his  history  he  was 
not  a  child  of  wrath,  not  spiritually  dead,  but  "  alive."  When 
was  this  ?  He  answers,  "  Before  the  commandment  came." 
Not  before  it  came  from  God,  for  Paul  Avas  not  then  in  exis- 
tence ;  hence  it  must  have  been  before  it  came  to  him,  as  to  an 
intelligent  and  responsible  being.  In  that  state  the  old  sin  of 
Adam  which  had  been  slain  by  the  obedience  of  Christ,  was 
dead,  and  he  was  alive — alive  because  the  "  free  gift "  had  come 
upon  him  as  it  had  "upon  all  men  unto  justification  of  life." 
But  he  adds  :  "  When  the  commandment  came,  sin  revived,  and 
I  died." 

But  it  might  be  asked,  if  he  died  in  consequence  of  the 
coming  to  him  of  the  commandment  contained  in  the  law,  how 
can  he  account  for  the  prevalence  of  sin  and  death  before  the 
law?  He  anticipates  the  question,  and  meets  it,  Rom.  5 :  13,  14. 
"For  until  the  law,"  i.  e.,  before  the  written  law  was  given, 
"  sin  was  in  the  world ;  but  sin  is  not  imputed  where  there  is  no 
law."  As  therefore  it  was  "  in  the  world  "  and  was  "  imputed," 
it  follows  that  there  was  law,  namely,  the  law  written  in  their 
hearts.  He  continues :  "  Nevertheless  death  reigned  from 
Adam  to  Moses,  even  over  them  that  had  not  sinned  after  the 
similitude  of  Adam's  transgression."  Who  were  these?  Infants 
and  idiots?  I  think  not.  They  never  died  the  death  here 
spoken  of,  the  death  of  the  soul,  death  as  the  consequence  of 
actual  sin.  And  these  sinners  had  violated  no  express  precept, 
no  formal  commandment,  as  Adam  had  done,  but  they  had 
sinned  against  the  law  written  in  their  hearts  and  consciences. 
Just  as  Paul  died  for  violating  the  written  commandment,  so 
these  persons  died  for  violating  the  unwritten.  How  fearfully 
this  weighty  Scripture  is  abused,  and  how  the  argument  it  pre- 
sents is  voided  of  its  force,  when  the  reign  of  death  is  inter- 


THE  aitOUXD  OF  MAX'S  XEED  OF  SAL  VATION. 


109 


preted  to  mean  physical  death  !  Did  any  one  ever  suppose  that 
physical  death  was  introduced  by  the  law,  making  it  necessary 
for  the  apostle  gravely  to  arajue  that  it  prevailed  from  Adam  to 
Moses  !  Or  again,  did  we  need  inspiration  to  inform  us  that 
infants  and  idiots  died  a  physical  death  before  the  giving  of  the 
law!  No,  it  means  spiritual  death,  death  as  the  consequence 
of  violated  law.  But  now,  on  the  other  hand,  what  propriety 
would  there  be  in  the  Apostle's  argument  if  the  dictum  of  the- 
ology be  true,  that  all  men,  as  well  before  as  after  the  law,  are 
born  dead  !  If  that  is  so,  why  should  he  feel  called  upon  to 
show  that  in  one  particular  period  of  history  death  reigned  ? 

But  enough.  All  these  Scriptures  beautifully  harmonize 
with  the  conception  that  all  men  died  spiritually  in  Adam,  and 
were  all  made  alive  again  in  Christ,  thus  constituting  liim  liter- 
ally and  in  this  high  sense,  "the  Savior  of  all  men."  And  then  when 
they  become  personally  guilty  of  "many  olfences,"  his  grace 
equally  abounds  for  the  justification  of  every  one  who  will  ac- 
cept it,  making  him  thus  the  Savior  "specially  of  them  that  be- 
lieve." I  conclude,  therefore,  that  by  the  infinite  mercy  of  God 
we  are  not  the  victims  of  a  remote  ancestral  act.  Our  first  fath- 
er fell,  it  is  true,  but  in  the  merit  of  the  Lamb  slain  from  the 
foundation  of  the  world,  he  rose  again.  If  our  nature  was  in 
him  when  he  fell,  it  was  also  in  him  when  he  rose.  I  feel  that 
we  may  rightfully  claim  to  be  the  progeny  of  living  Adam — of 
Adam  justified  unto  life  by  Jesus  Christ,  and  in  worshipful  com- 
munion with  God.  And  now  for  us  it  is  true,  as  it  was  for  him, 
and  in  the  same  sense,  that  "the  wages  of  sin  is  death;"  while 
for  him  it  was  also  true,  as  it  is  for  us,  that  "the  gift  of  God  is 
eternal  life  through  Jesus  Christ  our  Lord." 


///.    ACTUAL  SINS. 

To  what  extent  our  moral  nature  may  have  become  enfeebled 
in  the  course  of  ages,  it  is  not  easy  to  say.  But  it  is  reasonable 
to  suppose  that  we  have  inherited  tendencies  to  evil — a  certain 


110  THE  GEOVKD  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 


proclivity  to  go  astray.  And  yel  it  seems  to  me  that  we  often 
over-estimate  the  effect  of  such  tendency.  We  look  abroad  and 
see  that  sin  is  universally  prevalent,  that  all  have  sinned  and 
come  short  of  the  glory  of  God,  that  there  is  none  that  doeth 
good,  no,  not  one  ;  and  we  are  apt  to  jump  to  the  conclusion  that 
all  this  is  proof  of  hereditary  depravity,  and  thus  in  some  meas- 
ure we  shift  the  burden  of  our  own  personal  responsibility.  We 
are  sinners,  to  be  sure,  but  it  is  not  wholly  our  fault.  We  can 
account  for  our  sins.  There  is  a  reason  for  them.  And  so  while 
we  fancy  that  we  are  bewailing  our  depravity,  we  are  really 
soothing  our  consciences.  Like  Adam  we  are  hiding  from  God 
among  the  trees  of  the  garden ;  and  having  covered  our  shame 
witli  flimsy  fig-leaves,  we  throw  our  responsibility  upon  some- 
body else.  Now  whatever  may  be  the  truth  as  to  our  nature — 
its  frailty,  its  tendencies,  or,  if  any  one  prefers  the  word,  its  cor- 
ruption ;  and  however  we  may  have  acquired  that  nature — deep 
down  in  our  honest  souls  we  feel  that  it  furnishes  no  excuse  for 
our  sin.  We  are  flesh  and  blood;  we  have  animal  passions, 
lusts,  appetites,  desires,  which  tend  to  draw  us  away  from  our 
high  spiritual  interests,  and  entice  us  to  do  wrong.  It  does  not 
help  the  matter  to  give  a  name  to  all  this,  to  call  it  "depravity," 
even  "total  depravity,"  or,  if  any  one  think  so,  "hereditary  total 
depravitj^."  It  is  in  any  case  a  fact,  a  fact  that  we  must  try 
to  meet  in  the  strength  of  divine  grace,  and  with  manly  self- 
control. 

These  lusts  are  our  own  ;  they  are  a  part  of  our  composite 
personality ;  they  are  recognized  in  the  Bible  as  elements  of  all 
human  nature,  and  as  being  intimately  connected  with  the  gen- 
esis of  sin.  "Every  man  is  tempted  when  he  is  drawn  away  of 
his  own  lust,  and  enticed.  Then  when  lust  hath  conceived,  it 
bringeth  forth  sin;  and  sin,  when  it  is  finished,  bringeth  forth 
death."  Jas.  1:  14,  15.  After  conceding  all  that  we  should  re- 
specting the  enfeebling  influence  of  heredity  upon  our  moral 
stamina,  it  is  still  true  that  in  the  very  beginning  sin  was  born 
of  the  same  parentage.    Eve  had  inherited  no  fallen  nature. 


THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION.  Ill 


Adam  was  not  totally  depraved.  No  fountain  of  corruption  had 
transmitted  its  polluting  stream  to  them ;  no  weakening  of  will 
power,  no  strengthening  of  lustful  tendency  had  come  to  them 
from  afar.  They  were  both  as  God  had  made  them,  pure,  spot- 
less, simple.  And  yet  they  yielded  to  the  very  first  temptation! 
How  do  we  account  for  that  ?  The  universal  prevalence  of  sin 
among  Adam's  descendants  is  regarded  generally  as  proof  posi- 
tive of  their  inherited  depravity,  and  yet  not  one  of  them  has 
ever  been  placed  in  circumstances  as  favorable  to  moral  stabil- 
ity as  those  which  surrounded  him.  They  all  begin  life  in  utter 
feebleness  and  ignorance  ;  they  grow  into  responsibility  sur- 
rounded by  numberless  temptations,  of  every  possible  form  and 
of  every  degree  of  strength  ;  is  it  any  wonder  that  they  fall  into 
sin?  The  surprise,  the  miracle,  woald  be  if  they  did  not.  Man, 
as  God  originally  made  him,  man  as  he  has  since  made  every 
one  of  us,  a  being  with  free  will,  with  a  spiritual  nature  vitally 
connected  with  an  animal  nature,  having  passions,  appetites  and 
lusts,  may  be  expected  to  sin,  sooner  or  later,  when  confronted 
with  temptations.  And  it  is  these  individual  and  personal  sins 
about  which  we  should  be  chiefly  concerned.  It  is  for  these  and 
not  for  the  nature  in  which  we  were  born,  that  we  are  responsi- 
ble. Whether  that  nature  be  esteemed  good  or  bad,  depraved 
or  pure,  corrupt  or  innocent,  one  truth  is  clear :  '-It  is  He  that 
hath  made  us,  and  not  we  ourselves." 

It  seems  to  me  that  the  time  has  come  in  the  religious  devel- 
opment of  the  world,  when  we  should  cease  to  find  fault  with 
our  nature,  and  remember  that  its  Author  is  infinitely  wise  and 
good.  He  has  not  given  us  a  moral  constitution  that  is  un- 
friendly to  us.  There  is  not  a  passion  in  man's  soul  nor  a  desire 
in  his  body  that  in  itself  is  wrong.  They  are  all  "very  good," 
and  are  all  meant  to  promote  our  highest  interest  and  well- 
being.  If  we  abuse  them,  and  make  them  ministers  of  sin  and 
evil,  of  suflering  and  sorrow,  the  fault  is  ours  and  not  our 
Maker's.    If,  in  our  folly  and  self-will,  we  choose  to  pervert  his 


112  THE  GBOrXI)  OF  MAX'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 

design  and  thwart  liis  purpose,  it  ill  becomes  us  to  reply  against 
God,  and  say,  "Why  hast  thou  made  me  thus  ?" 

But  now  let  me  say  that  I  have  not  antagonized  the  com- 
monly received  doctrine  of  hereditary  depravity  with  the  object 
of  lowering  our  conception  of  human  sin,  but  rather  to  increase 
it.  I  oppose  it  because  it  appears  to  me  to  be  a  sort  of  unreality, 
a  theological  fiction  that  does  not  come  home  to  our  consciences. 
It  is  the  substitution  of  words  for  things,  of  black  paint  for 
black  hearts.  Sin  is  an  awful  fact,  a  deep-seated  disease,  a 
pollution,  a  crime,  and  we  shall  be  wise  to  look  for  its  fons  et 
'prbicip'mm  in  ourselves  rather  than  in  our  ancestry.  Let  us  try 
to  ap]3reciate  what  it  is. 

If  a  mere  verbal  definition  would  suSice,  without  looking 
deeper,  our  task  would  be  easy.    "  Sin  is  the  transgression  of 
the  law."    (1  Jno.  3 :  4.)    But  whether  we  accept  this  transla- 
tion or  prefer  that  of  the  Revised  Version,  "  sin  is  lawlessness," 
in  either  case  it  is  manifest  that  before  we  can  appreciate  the 
nature  of  this  fearful  evil,  we  must  gain  some  adequate  concep- 
tion of  the  term  "  law  "  as  used  in  the  Bible.    And  here  ordi- 
nary definition  will  not  sufiice.    "  Law  in  its  most  general  and 
comprehensive  sense,"  says  Blackstone,  "  is  a  rule  of  action." 
This  may,  perhaps,  be  sufiiciently  accurate  as  a  definition  of 
human  law,  because,  owing  to  the  imperfection  of  the  tribunals 
which  administer  it,  they  can  take  cognizance  only  of  "actions." 
If  they  assume  to  look,  as  they  sometimes  must,  into  the  inten- 
tion of  any  given  act,  they  can  do  so  only  to  the  extent  that 
such  intention  is  manifested  by  the  act,  or  by  other  external  cir- 
cumstances capable  of  proof.    However  evil  the  purpose,  how- 
ever malicious  the  intention,  however  abandoned  and  malignant 
the  heart,  human  law  waits  for  the  corresponding  action  before 
pronouncing  its  sentence  or  inflicting  its  penalty.    Indeed  our 
criminal  statutes  are  made  up  mainly  if  not  exclusivel}^  of  defi- 
nition and  penalty  ;  and  it  is  only  by  a  sort  of  accommodation 
that  it  is  proper  to  speak  of  them  as  "law."    Our  codes  do  not 
say,  "  Thou  shalt  not  kill,"  "  Thou  shalt  not  steal,"  "  Thou  shalt 


THE  GBOUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION.  113 

not  bear  false  witness."  They  define  the  murderous  killing,  the 
crime  of  stealing,  of  perjury,  and  the  like,  and  they  affix  such 
penalties  as  are  deemed  necessary  for  the  protection  of  society, 
but  the  law  against  these  olfenses  is  not  in  the  code,  save  by 
implication.  It  is  found  only  in  the  code  of  heaven — found  only 
there  because  none  but  the  Searcher  of  hearts  can  make  a  law 
for  the  heart.  "  I  had  not  known  lust,"  says  the  apostle,  "  ex- 
cept the  law  had  said,  Thou  shalt  not  covet."  Here  was  a  law 
addressed  to  the  inner  man,  regulating  and  controlling  the  very 
desire  of  the  soul,  a  law  which  might  be  violated  without  the 
performance  of  any  external  action,  a  law  which  the  Apostle 
did  violate  by  cherishing  improper  desires,  and  such  violation 
was  sin.  "He  that  hateth  his  brother,  is  a  murderer."  "He 
that  looketh  upon  a  woman  to  lust  after  her,  hath  committed 
adultery  with  her  already  in  his  heart."  "Out  of  the  heart  i)ro- 
ceed  evil  thoughts,  adulteries,  murders."  These  are  but  a  few 
of  the  many  passages  which  show  that  the  law  of  God  reaches 
down  to  the  very  fountain  of  being.  Furthermore,  the  terms 
used  by  the  Holy  Spirit  to  describe  the  cure  of  sin,  are  indica- 
tive of  the  same  fact.  "  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God  that  taketh 
away  the  sin  of  the  world."  But  sinful  actions  cannot  be 
"  taken  away ; "  they  must  remain  forever  as  part  of  the  his- 
tory of  the  sinner.  It  is  the  guilt,  the  pollution,  lying  back  of 
those  actions  to  which  reference  is  made.  In  like  manner  we 
read  of  "  washing,"  of  "  cleansing,"  of  "purging  the  conscience," 
all  pointing  to  the  ego,  the  self,  the  inner  heart  and  soul  of  the 
man,  as  the  seat  of  the  sin.  We  sometimes  hear  men  speak 
flippantly  and  lightly  of  some  sinful  deed,  as  though  that  were 
the  whole  of  it.  They  regard  it  as  a  very  small  matter,  and  can 
hardly  be  brought  to  believe  that  eternal  justice  can  visit  it 
with  such  penalties  as  the  Bible  portraj^s.  But  when  we  con- 
template the  deed  as  but  the  sign  of  a  lawless  and  rebellious 
heart,  as  the  evidence  and  proof  that  the  man  himself  is  alien- 
ated from  God,  that  his  will  is  antagonistic  to  the  divine  will 

and  his  affections  misdirected  and  polluted,  we  can  readily  per- 
8 


114 


THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 


ceive  how  righteously  the  man  can  be  judged  according  to  his 
deeds,  nay,  even  without  any  deeds,  be  condemned  by  Him  who 
searches  the  heart  and  tries  tlie  reins  of  the  children  of  men. 

Sin,  therefore,  is  not  a  matter  merely  of  conduct,  though  of 
course  the  feelings  of  the  heart  and  the  purposes  of  the  soul 
will  generally  manifest  themselves  by  external  actions.  But 
evermore  sin  is  lawlessness,  and  the  divine  law  is  not  only  a 
rule  of  action,  but  a  rule  of  being,  as  well.  It  reaches  down  to 
the  inmost  state  and  condition  of  responsible  man,  searching, 
trying,  weighing  him,  to  see  what  he  is,  and  not  merely  what  he 
does.  In  its  last  analysis  all  the  law  is  for  the  heart :  "  Thou 
shalt  love  the  Lord  thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  with  all  thy 
soul,  and  with  all  thy  mind  and  with  all  thy  strength ;  this  is 
the  first  and  great  commandment.  And  the  second  is  like  unto 
it,  Thou  shalt  love  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.  On  these  two  com- 
mandments hang  all  the  law  and  the  prophets."  In  presence  of 
such  a  law,  we  can  but  feel  that  we  are  guilty,  that  we  have  not 
kept  it,  but  daily  and  hourly  have  violated  it.  We  have  all 
gone  out  of  the  way,  we  have  all  together  become  filthy,  we  are 
defiled  and  unholy  in  his  sight ;  it  is  our  own  act,  our  own  deed, 
our  own  state ;  starting  in  innocence  and  purity  we  have 
"become"  all  this,  we  have  "gone  out  of  the  way."  This  is 
sin,  and  sin  when  it  is  finished  bringeth  forth  death,  we  are  lost, 
and  left  to  ourselves,  lost  forever.  Such  is  the  state  of  man  in 
consequence  of  his  own  actual  transgressions — guilty,  con- 
demned, impotent  and  helpless.  God  alone  can  save  him.  Has 
he  provided  a  way  of  escape  ?  and  if  so,  what  ?  A  brief  chap- 
ter in  answer  to  these  questions  will  conclude  what  I  desired  to 
say  on  the  subject  assigned  me. 

IV.    THE  BEMEDT. 

Having  shown  from  the  Scriptures  that  the  "  free  gift "  of 
the  Son  of  God  to  the  world  and  for  the  world,  and  his  perfect 
obedience  as  the  head  and  representative  of  the  human  race, 


THE  O ROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION.  115 

resulted  in  the  complete  restoration  of  man  to  his  forfeited 
estate,  unconditionally  and  absolutely  taking  away  the  sin  of 
the  world,  that  is,  original  sin ;  and  having  shown  that  in  con- 
sequence of  this  perfect  work  we  do  not  begin  our  career  upon 
the  earth  as  dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins,  but  "  alive  "  and 
"  made  righteous ; "  and  having  shown  that  notwithstanding 
this,  all  flesh  has  corrupted  its  way  and  become  guilty  of  actual 
sins — it  remains  to  point  out  the  remedy  which  infinite  grace 
has  provided  for  these  "  many  ofienses." 

It  is  obvious  to  remark  that,  fundamentally  conceived,  the 
provision  for  the  removal  of  these  two  classes  of  sins  is  one  and 
the  same.  In  both  cases  Jesus  Christ  is  the  only  Savior.  But 
while  in  the  case  of  original  sin  he  could,  and  therefore  he  did, 
take  it  away  absolutely  and  without  any  condition,  save, 
doubtless,  the  repentance  of  Adam,  in  the  other,  such  removal 
of  transgression  was  in  the  nature  of  things  impossible. 
Actual  sin  is  an  abiding  state,  a  continuous  product,  an  ever- 
flowing  stream,  an  outgushing  from  the  heart  which  loves  sin 
and  which  does  not  love  God.  Hence  it  cannot  be  removed  by 
a  simple  proclamation  of  amnesty,  or  a  decree  of  forgiveness. 
We  can  readily  conceive  how  "one  ofi'ense "  could  be  thus 
taken  away,  for  that  would  be  the  end  of  it ;  but  when  a  living- 
fountain  of  sin  is  to  be  purified  ;  when  a  heart  of  iniquity  is  to 
be  cleansed,  and  the  very  cause  of  crime  and  guilt  to  be  reached 
and  overcome,  the  remedy  cannot  be  applied  without  the  con- 
currence of  the  sinner.  It  may  be  in  itself  abundantly  suffi- 
cient and  even  infinitely  efficacious,  but  until  it  be  voluntarily 
accepted  and  heartily  appropriated,  it  cannot  reach  the  disease 
nor  accomplish  its  cure. 

It  will  be  seen  that  I  am  putting  the  case  as  though  all  the 
difficulty,  all  the  obstacle,  lay  with  the  sinner.  I  am  well 
aware,  however,  that  theology  pursues  a  very  different  course. 
It  assumes,  and  gives  large  prominence  to  the  assumption,  that 
there  were  serious  impediments  on  the  divine  side,  impediments 
which  prevented  the  outflow  of  efficacious  and  saving  grace. 


116  THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 

In  consequence  of  this  it  could  not  reach  the  sinner.  The  infi- 
nite mind  seems  to  be  represented  as  if  it  had  arrested  the 
stream  of  salutary  benevolence  short  of  human  sin  and  human 
need,  and  was  waiting  for  something  to  be  done  that  would  jus- 
tify it,  in  the  eyes  of  the  universe,  in  breaking  over  all  impedi- 
ments, and  thus  extending  the  saving  grace  far  enough  to  reach 
the  lost  sinner.  And  this,  according  to  theology,  was  the  work 
accomplished  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  I  am  not  pretending 
to  state  this  doctrine  in  the  precise  terms  used  by  theologians, 
but  simply  to  give  the  impression  made  upon  a  mind  which  is 
not  biased  by  any  theological  system.  It  should  also  be  stated 
that  these  theologians  do  not  claim  that  the  above  represents 
the  whole  of  Christ's  work  but  it  occupies  with  them  the  fore- 
most place,  and  they  evidently  regard  the  impediment  in  the 
mind  of  God,  and  which  Christ  removed,  as  the  chief  difficulty 
in  the  way  of  saving  the  sinner.  That  taken  out  of  the  way, 
the  soul  can  be  saved  unconditionally,  by  an  absolute  decree  of 
election.    And  with  many  this  is  the  only  way  of  salvation. 

Such  conditions  as  are  spoken  of  in  the  Bible,  and  urged  from 
the  pulpit,  often,  it  must  be  admitted,  with  great  fervency  and 
tenderness,  are  not  to  be  understood  as  conditions  of  salvation, 
for  that  has  already  been  secured  by  election,  but  as  means 
whereby  the  knowledge  of  this  salvation  may  be  imparted,  and 
become  a  blessed  experience. 

Now  to  my  mind,  viewing  the  subject  in  the  light  of  common 
sense  and  of  the  whole  tenor  of  Scripture,  all  this  seems  to  be 
fundamentally  erroneous  and  practically  hurtful.  I  grant  that 
there  are  certain  passages  in  the  Bible,  which,  taken  alone  and 
without  the  qualifications  of  other  Scriptures,  and  especially 
when  stretched  to  the  extreme  limit  of  their  possible  meaning, 
might  give  plausibility  to  the  above  position.  But  I  cannot 
pause  to  consider  these  here.  In  an  appendix  to  my  commen- 
tary on  Luke,  I  argued  the  whole  subject  of  the  atonement  with 
considerable  fullness.  I  have  seen  no  reason  since  to  modify 
the  conclusion  which  I  then  reached.    And  though  I  recognize 


TEE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION.  117 

and  appreciate  the  extreme  difficulty  encompassing  the  subject, 
I  feel  confident  that  the  truth  will  be  found  along  the  lines 
which  I  there  indicated. 

In  any  case,  after  all  the  metaphysical  perspicacity  and 
polemical  skill  of  theologians  have  been  expended  and  dis- 
played, Avhat  does  the  display  amount  to  ?  Men  may  split 
hairs  on  the  atonement ;  they  may  assume  to  enter  into  the 
counsels  of  the  Almighty,  and  to  understand  that  there  was  a 
serious  obstacle  in  the  way  of  his  forgiveness ;  they  may  tell 
what  it  was,  where  it  rested,  and  how  it  was  removed  by  the 
death  of  Christ,  for  they  seem  to  know  all  about  it,  but  the 
great  question  is,  cut  bono?  What  does  the  speculation  amount 
to?  The  great  sinning,  suflering,  perishing  world  knows 
nothing  of  it,  reads  it  not,  hears  it  not,  understands  it  not. 
And  if  it  did,  still  what  of  it  ?  These  metaphysics  furnish  no 
help,  comfort  no  heart,  save  no  soul,  nor  do  they  tell  any  one 
what  to  do  to  be  saved.  I  do  not  need  speculations  about  the 
divine  being,  nor  finely  drawn  distinctions  about  the  divine 
government.  I  am  a  sinner,  what  is  the  remedy  for  my  sin  ?  I 
am  alienated  in  heart  and  life,  how  can  I  be  reconciled  to  God  ? 

To  these  questions,  welling  up  from  the  sinful  soul  of 
humanity,  Grod  responds  with  his  blessed  gospel,  the  gospel  of 
love.  Behold  the  Lamb  of  God !  Look  unto  Christ.  Gaze 
upon  him.  See  him  bleeding,  suflering,  dying  for  you.  Love 
him,  trust  him,  draw  near  to  him,  nay,  come  unto  him,  embrace 
him.  Enter  into  sympathy  with  his  great  heart  of  love,  and 
know  that  it  is  God's  heart.  He  has  come  to  you  and  come  for 
you,  to  show  that  God  loves  you,  and  that  he  is  ready,  willing, 
waiting  to  be  gracious  to  you  and  to  save  you  from  your  sins. 

Whether  we  can  understand  the  philosophy  of  it  or  not,  we 
know  it  to  be  true  that  this  display  of  divine  love,  with  its 
Gethsemane  and  its  Calvary,  its  tears  and  agony  and  blood,  and 
this  tender  pleading  of  the  divine  compassion,  have  proved  to 
be  the  wisdom  of  God  and  the  power  of  God  unto  salvation 
to  every  one  who  believes.    This  gospel,  so  simple,  in  the 


118  TEE  GBOUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION. 

eyes  of  the  world  so  foolish,  to  inconsiderate  men  so  weak,  is 
precisely  adapted  to  the  case.  It  reaches  the  seat  of  the 
disease,  and  purifies  the  very  heart.  "  O,  the  depth  of  the 
riches  both  of  the  wisdom  and  of  the  knowledge  of  God ! " ' 

In  presenting  the  divine  remedy  for  sin  I  have  limited  myself 
to  the  gospel  of  the  grace  of  God,  and  have  said  nothing  of  those 
spiritual  influences,  which  with  many  writers  would  probably 
occupy  the  first  and  most  prominent  place  in  the  discussion. 
But  in  adopting  this  course  I  would  by  no  means  be  understood 
as  ignoring  the  presence  or  necessity  of  such  influences.  I  be- 
lieve in  them.  I  believe  that  the  Holy  Spirit  of  light  and  love 
and  truth,  is  present  with  the  gospel,  operating  in  it  and  through 
it  upon  the  heart  of  the  sinner.  I  do  not  think  of  the  gospel  as 
abstract,  separate  and  distinct.  I  cannot  conceive  that  it  would 
be  gospel  if  God  were  not  in  it,  if  it  came  in  "word  only,"  and 
not  "in  demonstration  of  the  Spirit  and  of  power."  But  while  I 
do  not  present  the  gospel  as  abstract  and  separate  from  the 
Spirit,  neither  do  I  conceive  the  influences  of  the  Spirit  as  ab- 
stract and  separate  from  the  gospel  in  the  work  of  salvation. 
Men  are  very  apt  to  make  a  serious  mistake  in  the  practical 
handling  of  this  important  subject;  and  as  a  matter  of  fact  it 
has  come  to  be  regarded  as  necessary  to  the  soundness  and  vital 
completeness  of  nearly  all  sermonizing  to  preach  the  Spirit! 
Our  commission  does  not  authorize  it,  no  Apostolic  example  jus- 
tifies it,  and  yet  perpetually  in  our  modern  pulpits,  with  endless 
iteration  and  reiteration,  the  minds  of  sinners  are  directed  to 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  they  are  taught  before  everything  else  to 
look  and  wait  and  pray  for  his  influences.  Earnestly  as  I  be- 
lieve in  the  existence  and  necessity  of  these  gracious  and  life- 
giving  powers,  when  contemplated  as  the  scriptures  present 
them,  I  still  think  that  to  present  them  as  abstractions,  as  some- 
thing to  be  looked  at  apart,  or  at  any  rate  the  exhibition  of  them 
in  the  forefront  of  the  gospel  proclamation,  is  a  reversal  of  the 
well  known  apostolic  process,  and  equivalent  to  "another  gospel, 
which  is  not  another."    "There  is  no  name  under  heaven  given 


THE  GROUND  OF  MAN'S  NEED  OF  SALVATION.  119 

among  men  by  which  we  can  be  saved  but  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ."  We  must  preach  him,  preach  him  in  all  the  fullness 
of  his  love  and  the  tenderness  of  his  compassion,  and  resolve 
to  know  nothing  and  proclaim  nothing  but  Jesus  Christ  and  him 
crucified.  Thus  we  come  into  sympathy  with  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  into  co-operation  with  him.  He  preaches  Christ,  not  him- 
self; testifies  of  Christ;  holds  him  up  ;  sets  him  forth  ;  and  calls 
to  the  perishing  world  to  look  to  him  and  be  saved.  And  when 
the  heart  of  the  sinner  is  melted  by  this  exhibition  of  bleeding 
love ;  when  his  affections  are  won,  his  will  subdued,  and  his 
whole  life  brought  into  loving  and  trustful  harmony  with  God, 
then  indeed  he  has  a  new  heart ;  he  is  saved  from  sin  by  being 
saved  from  the  love  of  sin.  And  though  he  may  never  keep 
God's  holy  law  perfectly,  it  is  written  in  his  heart  and  in  his 
spirit.  He  loves  it,  loves  its  author,  loves  his  service  and  his 
ways,  and,  under  the  administration  of  benignant  grace,  "love 
is  the  fulfilling  of  the  law."  The  rebel  sinner,  dead  in  tres- 
passes and  in  sins,  has  been  regenerated  ;  he  is  born  again,  born 
from  above  ;  Jesus  Christ  is  his  brother,  God  is  his  Father;  and 
now  because  he  is  a  son,  God  sends  forth  the  spirit  of  a  son  into 
his  heart,  crying  Abba,  Father,  and  the  work  is  complete;  man, 
through  the  indwelling  Spirit,  is  in  fellowship  with  the  Father 
and  with  his  Son,  Jesus  Christ. 


THE  PROGEESS  OF  EE^^:LATIOX,  OR  THE  THREE 
DISPENSATIONS,  THEIR  LIMITS  AND 
CHARACTERISTICS . 


J.  J.  HALET. 

BEVELATIOX  PEOGBESSIVE. 

ADivrxE  Revelation  is  tlie  making  known  of  God,  Dnty,  and 
ImmortalitY.  Its  method  in  the  Christian  Scriptures  is 
historical,  its  purpose  is  redemptive  and  educational.  The 
medium  of  communication  between  God  and  man  in  a  written 
revelation  is  inspired  language  and  inspired  action.  The  origi- 
nal sources,  objective  and  subjective,  natural  and  supernatural, 
of  the  divine  manifestation  are  nature,  conscience,  the  Bible  and 
Providence.  Natural  supernaturalism,  according  to  Carljle,  is 
God  in  nature ;  ethical  supernaturalism,  according  to  Emerson, 
is  God  in  conscience ;  historical  supernaturalism,  according  to 
Jesus  Christ,  is  God  in  history,  and  providential  supernatural- 
ism, as  noted  in  the  experience  of  spiritual  men,  is  God  in  prov- 
idence. All  the  world  knows  of  God  and  his  immanence  in  the 
universe,  and  human  relations  to  Him,  and  the  obligations  that 
grow  out  of  these  relations,  is  derived  from  these  sources.  As 
the  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testaments  are  recognized 
by  Christians  as  the  only  authoritative  objective  revelation  of 
spiritual  truth,  and  may  be  said  to  contain  the  combined  results 
of  all  the  other  revelations,  together  with  the  record  of  the  moral 
history  of  the  race  for  four  thousand  years,  it  will  be  needful  in 
this  condensed  and  necessarily  brief  statement  of  principles  to 
confine  attention  to  a  few  of  the  trunk  lines  of  development,  and 
the  three  most  prominent  stages  in  the  evolution  of  the  inspired 
history  of  these  sacred  books.    The  conception  of  revelation 

(120) 


J.  J.  HALEY. 


J.  J.  Haley  was  born  in  Rockcastle  county,  Kentucky,  March  18,  1851, 
He  acquired  a  good,  common  scliool  education,  and  entered  Kentucky 
Unversity  in  1869,  at  tlie  age  of  eigliteen.  Here  he  remained  four  years, 
taking  a  liberal  course  in  the  College  of  Arts,  and  finishing  the  Bible  College 
Course  in  1873.  He  ranked  high  as  a  student,  and  "vvas  one  of  the  five 
editors  of  the  College  pai)er,  thus  early  sliowing  his  ability  for  literary  work, 
in  which  he  was  destined  to  have  considerable  experience.  After  leaving 
College  he  entered  upon  the  active  work  of  the  ministry,  preaching  one  year 
in  the  State  of  Mississippi,  when  he  was  selected,  at  the  suggestion  of  Prof. 
McGarvey,  to  go  to  Sydnej^,  New  South  Wales,  in  response  to  a  call  from 
that  country  for  an  American  Evangelist.  He  was  married  on  the  13th  of 
April,  1874,  to  Miss  Clark,  of  Kentucky,  and  started  for  the  Southern  Hem- 
isphere the  next  day,  by  way  of  San  Francisco.  After  a  stormy  voyage  he 
arrived  in  Sydney,  May  26th.  He  remained  in  Australia  and  New  Zealand 
about  eleven  years,  preaching  with  marked  success  in  three  capital  cities, 
being  two  years  in  Sydney,  two  and  a  half  in  Dunedin,  N.  Z.,  and  six  years 
in  Melbourne,  the  two  latter  charges  being  the  largest  and  most  important 
among  the  Disciples  in  Australia.  At  the  beginning  of  his  work  in  Mel- 
bourne he  preached  seven  months  in  tlie  Academy  of  Music,  having  a  seating 
capacity  of  2,500,  which  was  insufficient  often  to  accommodate  the 
audiences. 

While  in  Melbourne  Mr.  Haley  held  a  debate  with  a  Methodist  preacher 
on  baptism,  wMch  was  published  in  a  neat  volume  of  300  pages.  He  also 
assisted  T.  J.  Gore,  of  Adelaide,  in  editing  (he  Australian  Christian 
Pioneer,  and  at  the  beginning  of  the  second  year,  on  the  basis  of  the 
Pioneer,  he  established  the  Australian  Christum  \Vatch}nnn,  wliich  became 
the  most  widely  circulated  and  influential  paper  among  the  Disciples 
in  Australia.  This  paper,  which  he  edited  for  five  years,  is  still  in  existence 
under  another  title.  At  the  beginning  of  liSsS  he  return(>d  to  America  and 
supplied  for  the  Christian  Church  in  San  Francisco  for  twelve  months,  and 
received  an  unanimous  and  urgent  call  to  the  permanent  pastorate  of  that 
congregation,  but  declined,  returning  to  his  native  State  and  taking  charge 
of  the  church  at  Midway,  near  Lexington,  the  heart  of  the  Bi  ue 
Grass  region.  While  here  he  became  one  of  the  editorial  staff  of  tlie  Apos- 
tolic Guide,  now  published  at  Louisville,  Ky.  At  the  end  of  his  second  year 
at  Midway,  he  received  a  call  from  the  Christian  Pul)libliing  Co.,  St.  Louis, 
!Mo.,  to  become  the  office  editor  of  the  Christiun-EvaiHjclist — wiiich  place  he 
filled  with  ability  until  he  accepted  the  call  of  the  Foreign  ]\Iission  Board  to 
go  to  Birkenhead,  England,  Avhere  he  is  now  laboring.  He  retains  a  place 
on  the  writing  force  of  the  Cltrislian-Evangelist,  and  his  weekly  English 
Letters  furnish  a  splendid  resume  of  European  events. 


TEE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


that  rejects  the  doctrine  of  mechanical  dictation  and  the  factory 
theory  of  a  ready  made  Bible  in  heaven,  and  regards  it  as  a 
great  historic  movement  in  which  the  Spirit  of  God  brooded 
over  humanity  as  over  the  ancient  chaos  of  the  physical  crea- 
tion, standing  behind  it  as  a  propelling  force,  going  before  it  as 
a  directing  energy,  working  through  it  and  with  it  as  a  present 
inspiration,  with  the  ultimate  end  steadily  in  view  of  educating 
and  elevaiing  the  race  into  a  higher  and  diviner  life — this  is  the 
conception  that  will  be  assumed  and  illustrated,  but  not  argued 
in  this  paper.  Long  before  the  distinct  application  of  the 
scientific  theory  of  evolution  to  questions  of  Biblical  criticism, 
it  was  well  understood  that  the  religion  of  the  Bible  was  a 
development  along  the  lines  of  the  national  history  of  a  chosen 
people,  a  gradually  unfolding  process  of  "line  upon  line,  and 
precept  upon  precept,  here  a  little  and  there  a  little,"  beginning 
with  the  revelation  of  a  personal  God  to  the  patriarchs,  and  ter- 
minating after  thousands  of  years  of  redemptive  progress  in  a 
glorified  kingdom,  and  a  redeemed  society  in  a  new  heaven  and 
a  new  earth  wherein  dwelleth  righteousness.  In  the  beautiful 
unfolding  of  the  divine  plan  of  mercy  and  grace  we  have  the 
religion  of  an  individual,  the  religion  of  a  family,  the  religion  of 
a  nation  and  the  religion  of  a  world,  in  which  is  comprehended, 
in  lengthening  lines  and  extending  circles,  the  history  of  redemp- 
tion from  Eden  to  the  Millennium.  It  required  forty  centuries 
of  time  and  a  succession  of  divine  teachers,  supplemented  by 
the  sacrifice  of  a  host  of  prophets  and  martyrs,  to  educate 
man's  intensely  gross  and  selfish  nature  up  to  the  point  of  grasp- 
ing the  sentiment  of  universal  love.  From  local  and  national 
limitations  in  which  the  Jehovah  of  the  Hebrews  appeared  to  be 
a  sectional  deity,  the  culmination  was  reached  in  the  compre- 
hension of  God's  unfolding  philanthropy  when  the  Holy  Spirit 
inspired  the  heart  and  fired  the  tongue  of  Peter  to  give  forth  the 
signal  word  of  the  New  Dispensation  in  the  sublime  oracle,  "I 
perceive  of  a  truth  that  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons,  but  in 
every  nation  he  that  fears  God  and  works  righteousness  is 


122 


THE  PBOGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


accepted  of  Him."  Christ's  idea  of  the  evolution  of  religion, 
based  upon  the  analogy  of  natural  growth,  is  expressed  in  the 
sentence,  "First  the  blade,  then  the  ear,  after  that  the  full  corn 
in  the  ear;"  and  it  may  be  justly  remarked  that  this  growth  of 
religious  knowledge  through  a  gradual  revelation,  was  not  from 
the  false  to  the  true,  from  the  wrong  to  the  right,  from  a  misap- 
prehension of  God  to  a  true  representation  of  Him  ;  but  from  the 
obscure,  the  fragmentary,  and  the  imperfect,  to  the  clear,  the 
complete,  and  the  perfect. 

1.  As  preliminar}^  and  yet  an  essential  part  of  what  I  shall 
have  to  say  on  the  dispensations  and  their  characteristics,  it 
may  be  first  observed  that  the  chief  line  of  the  development  of 
revelation  as  it  runs  through  the  Bible  is  in  respect  to  larger, 
truer,  and  better  ideas  of  God.  The  God  of  the  history  of  crea- 
tion in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  of  the  patriarchal  fathers,  of 
Moses  and  the  prophets,  the  Jehovah  of  hosts  who  led  Israel 
through  its  long  and  chequered  history,  is  the  God  and  Father 
revealed  in  Jesus  Christ,  only  in  more  adequate  fullness  of  man- 
ifestation. The  Biblical  method  of  disclosing  the  divine  nature 
is  b}^  taking  the  highest  examples  of  human  excellence  and  the 
tenderest  human  relationships  as  tj^es  and  illustrations  of  it. 
In  early  ages,  when  spiritual  truth  existed  in  its  most  rudi- 
mentary forms,  from  lack  of  culture  to  comprehend  it,  men's 
first  feeling  toward  God  was  one  of  reverence  and  awe.  This 
awe-fulness  was  best  expressed  to  their  minds  by  likening  him 
to  a  king.  "VVe  can  hardly  imagine  how  much  that  word 
expressed  to  an  oriental  to  whom  "the  king"  is  an  expression 
for  irresponsible  and  boundless  power.  Then  to  this  conception 
of  God  the  patriarchal  age  added  the  idea  of  justice.  In  a  rude 
and  violent  age  the  judge  who  protects  the  innocent  against  the 
oppressor  seems  the  highest  type  of  goodness ;  so  Abraham 
gives  that  title  to  the  Almighty  in  his  grand  appeal :  "Shall 
not  the  Judge  of  all  the  earth  do  right  ?"  A  gentler  and  sweeter 
image  was  suggested  by  pastoral  life  in  the  watchful  care  of  the 
shepherd  over  his  sheep.    "The  Lord  is  my  Shepherd,"  said 


THE  PROG  BESS  OF  IlEVELATION. 


123 


Israel's  poet-king,  in  one  of  the  finest  inspirations  of  the  ages. 
Then  came  in  the  quickened  pulse  of  the  prophetic  age  a  still 
higher  comparison  :  "Like  as  a  father  pitieth  his  children,  so 
the  Lord  pitieth  them  that  fear  Him."  Isaiah  in  a  time  of  spir- 
itual enlargement  in  Israel  found  a  yet  more  tender  similitude  : 
"As  one  whom  liis  motlier  comforteth  so  will  I  comfort  you." 
This  figure  of  parenthood  which  gleams  out  in  occasional 
flashes  of  prophetic  insi^iration  in  the  Old  Testament  is  woven 
into  all  the  teachings  of  Christ  as  perhaps  the  most  character- 
istic feature  of  the  last  and  best  of  the  dispensations.  He  made 
"  Our  Father  "  the  habitual  expression  for  him  whom  the  Jews 
had  been  wont  to  call  by  the  awful  name  of  Jehovah.  In  one 
of  the  most  striking  passages  of  the  Gospels  he  intimates  that 
earthly  fatherhood  and  motherhood  is  only  a  dim  suggestion  of 
the  infinite  wealth  of  the  divine  heart  in  its  filial  relation  to 
men:  "If  ye  then  being  evil" — in  all  your  earthly  imperfec- 
tions— "know  how  to  give  good  gifts  to  your  children,  how 
much  more  shall  your  heavenly  Father  give  good  things  unto 
them  that  ask  him." 

The  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  crowns  the  apex  of  the 
pyramid  of  revelation,  in  the  father's  unutterable  joy  and  glad- 
ness in  receiving  back  to  his  bosom  his  wayward  but  penitent 
boy — in  the  paternal  love  that  blots  out  all  the  past  of  sin  and 
shame,  and  confers,  in  token  of  forgiveness,  more  distinguished 
honors  upon  his  prodigal  child  than  if  he  had  never  sinned — in 
this  we  have  the  tenderest  and  most  touching  picture  of  God's 
paternal  heart,  and  his  fatherly  affection  for  the  world  of 
"  sinners  lost."  Christ  taught  this  lesson  of  which  his  whole 
life  and  death  was  a  splendid  manifestation:  that  there  is  a 
regnant  heart  of  sympathy  and  love  in  the  universe,  enthroned 
in  light  and  power  unspeakable,  yet  brooding  with  infinite  ten- 
derness and  patience  over  the  world,  not  because  men  are  per- 
fect and  good,  but  because  it  is  the  nature  of  God  to  love  and 
nourish  universal  being.  This  conception,  in  magnitude  and 
grandeur,  in  power  to  exalt  and  purify  the  race,  surpasses  all 


124 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION, 


Others,  and  is  sinking  deeper  into  men's  hearts  as  knowledge 
grows  with  time,  and  the  best  minds  of  the  race  are  finding  it 
more  and  more  difficult  to  believe  that  this  truth  is  the  discovery 
of  unassisted  human  thought.  The  Christ  idea  is  growing  upon 
the  world,  that  the  whole  vast  system  of  nature  and  providence 
is  regulated  in  every  part  by  the  one  central  force  of  love,  and 
we  are  learning  by  slow  degrees  to  make  the  same  force  central 
and  sovereign  in  our  own  lives.  Christ  has  taught  us  to  recog- 
nize in  our  sweetest  aflfections,  our  fairest  imaginings,  the  hopes 
that  soar  on  boldest  wing,  the  peace  vvhose  tranquillity  is  most 
perfect,  manifestations  of  the  divine  life  flowing  into  our  life — 
so  all  that  is  best  in  us  receives  its  highest  inspiration,  and  we 
may  walk  in  light  as  the  sons  of  God.  The  Grod  of  which  Christ 
is  the  revelation  is  not  a  different  God  from  the  one  made 
known  to  the  patriarchs  and  Jews,  but  the  same  God  more  fully 
and  adequately  revealed.  The  conception  of  God  as  a  King 
enthroned  in  majesty  and  wielding  authority,  as  a  Judge  hold- 
ing the  scales  of  justice  and  equity,  as  a  Shepherd  watching 
over  and  protecting  his  sheep,  as  a  Father  and  Mother  nourish- 
ing their  children  in  love,  is  essential  to  a  complete  revelation 
of  his  cliaracter  and  of  his  several  relations  to  men. 

2.  The  evolutionary  process  of  revelation  manward  is  seen 
in  the  progress  of  doctrine  in  the  Bible  from  the  outward  to  the 
inward,  from  external  restraints  to  inward  principles,  from  law 
to  Tove.  In  the  moral  childhood  of  the  race  and  the  earlier 
stages  of  revelation,  in  pursuance  of  an  educative  design,  the 
word  and  the  object  lesson  came  first,  the  truth  of  the  Spirit 
afterwards.  Outward  discipline  of  moral  conduct  precedes  the 
renewal  of  the  heart.  In  adaptation  to  the  necessary  limita- 
tions of  human  faculties  and  circumstances  religion  consists  of 
an  outward  form  and  an  inward  principle,  of  a  negative  exterior 
rule  as  preparatory  to  an  inward  and  positive  virtue.  The 
shadow  goes  before  the  substance,  the  sign  and  the  symbol 
prepare  for  the  spiritual  and  the  real.  The  plan  of  God's  reve- 
lation, as  in  the  ordinary  course  of  human  development,  neces- 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


125 


sarily  begins  with  external  regulations  and  provisions ;  and 
proceeding  by  tutors  and  governors  and  outward  agencies  ends 
at  last  in  the  law  of  liberty  and  the  freedom  of  the  spirit.  The 
Old  Testament  is  a  book  of  compulsory  precepts,  specific  direc- 
tions, and  ceremonial  rites,  adapted  to  the  race  in  its  spiritual 
minority.  The  comprehensive  principles  of  the  New  Testament, 
of  universal  application,  and  adapted  to  the  highest  ends  of 
spiritual  manhood,  are  the  product  of  a  later  age  in  this  divine 
revealing  process  of  inspired  history.  The  general  method  of 
all  primitive  revelations  was  from  without  with  an  inward  direc- 
tion in  the  self-manifestations  of  Jehovah  in  audible  voices, 
angelic  appearances,  dreams  and  visions,  the  Shekinah  above 
the  Mercy  Seat,  and  supernatural  signs  and  wonders.  Tlie  con- 
ception of  the  Holy  S{)irit  as  an  inspiring  and  regenerating  force 
speaking  and  working  from  within  the  soul  outwardly  in  the 
development  of  character  and  the  regulation  of  conduct,  and 
the  manifestation  of  power  for  service  to  God  and  man,  was 
almost  unknown  to  the  Israelites,  even  of  the  time  of  Moses.  It 
has  been  remarked,  and  not  without  significance,  that  the  word, 
"  conscience,"  without  which  we  cannot  conceive  of  any  religion, 
and  through  which  the  white  light  of  revelation  shines  into  our 
hearts,  occurs  but  once  in  the  Old  Testament,  and  then  in  a 
marginal  rendering  of  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes.  It  was  not  till 
the  profound  spiritual  history  of  the  Apostle  Paul  became  a 
factor  in  heaven's  revealing  process  that  this  became  a  cus- 
tomary term  in  Scripture  phraseology.  Its  use  marks  a  new 
era  and  the  latest  development  in  the  historic  movement  of  reve- 
lation and  may  be  said  to  transmute  the  outward  lesson  and  the 
visible  symbol  into  fuel  for  the  inner  light  of  the  spirit;  and 
thus  gives  a  wonderful  impetus  to  the  doctrine  of  individual 
consecration  and  the  sense  of  personal  responsibility  to  God. 

The  educational  trend  of  this  course  of  revelation  from  the 
outward  form  to  the  inward  principle,  from  the  letter  to  the 
spirit,  may  be  illustrated  from  the  elaborate  symbolism  of 
the  law  of  Moses  and  its  antitypical  fulfillment  in  the  gospel 


126 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


of  Christ.  The  characteristic  of  Mosaism  was  externalisra  and 
ritualism  with  a  deep  spiritual  intent  at  the  heart  of  it  to  be 
afterwards  revealed  and  understood.  It  is  not  to  be  supposed, 
nor  is  it  here  intimated,  that  the  Jews  were  without  ideas  of 
spiritual  religion.  The  moral  element  in  Judaism,  harnessed 
up  with  the  ceremonial,  was  conspicuous  enough,  if  instead  of 
confining  our  attention  to  its  details  we  take  a  broad  view  of  its 
place  in  the  general  history  of  mankind.  One  of  the  most 
interesting  problems  in  the  unfolding  of  the  Divine  economy  of 
grace  was  that  assigned  to  the  Jews  during  the  long  period 
of  their  national  history.  And  it  was  certainly  not  the  least  of 
the  providential  functions  of  that  remarkable  people  to  embody 
and  preserve  in  their  religious  forms  the  germs  of  a  great  after 
development,  which  was  not  so  much  in  the  foresight  of,  even 
the  wisest  Jews,  as  in  the  after  sight  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles 
and  those  who  became  their  spiritual  heirs.  The  intricate  sys- 
tem of  types  and  symbols  in  the  structure  and  furniture  of  the 
Tabernacle  and  Temple,  the  object  lessons  of  Judaism  in  their 
completest  form,  adumbrate  and  represent  the  spiritual  truth  of 
the  new  dispensation  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  all  of  this  elabo- 
rate symbolization  there  is  not  one  illustration  of  an  external  or 
material  truth.  The  inward  meaning,  not  at  first  understood, 
was  distinctly  and  wholly  spiritual.  The  Court  of  these  sacred 
inclosures  was  intended  to  separate  between  the  holy  and  the 
profane,  and  was  hence  symbolical  of  the  entire  separation  of 
the  church  from  the  world.  As  none  but  God's  people,  the 
Israelites,  had  a  right  to  enter  this  court,  so  none  but  converted 
and  consecrated  men  and  women  have  a  divine  right  to  enter 
the  sacred  precincts  of  the  church.  We  have  here  in  germ  the 
New  Testament  doctrine  of  a  spiritual  kingdom  and  a  regen- 
erated church  membership.  The  Laver  of  consecration,  sym- 
bolical of  cleansing,  carried  the  same  truth,  and  hence  the  daily 
washing  of  the  hands  and  feet  of  the  priesthood  was  typically 
significant  of  the  moral  and  spiritual  purity  required  of  all 
Christians.    In  the  initiation  and  consecration  of  the  Aaronic 


TEE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


127 


priesthood  an  animal  was  slain  and  its  blood  sprinkled  first 
upon  the  right  ear  of  the  sons  of  Aaron  to  sanctify  their  ears 
for  hearing  the  voice  of  God,  and  then  on  the  thumb  of  their 
right  hand  to  sanctify  their  hands  for  serving,  and  then  on  the 
great  toe  of  their  right  foot  to  sanctify  their  feet  for  treading 
God's  courts,  typical  of  the  sanctification  of  the  whole  man, 
body,  soul  and  spirit,  to  the  service  of  God.  The  holy  place 
and  its  furniture  typified  the  church  and  the  spiritualities  which 
the  gospel  represents.  The  table  of  shew  bread,  for  instance, 
was  emblematical  of  the  spiritual  food  of  Christians,  who  are  all 
priests  to  God.  The  cup  of  frankincense,  on  tlie  same  table, 
was  typical  of  praise  and  thanksgiving.  The  Candelabrum  or 
Golden  Candlestick,  with  its  seven  prongs,  represents  the  church 
as  God's  appointed  means  for  preserving  and  dispensing  the 
light  of  the  gospel,  the  sacred  number  seven  denoting  the  per- 
fection of  gospel  light.  The  pure  olive  oil  in  the  lamps  of  the 
candelabrum,  kept  perpetually  burning,  symbolized  the  Holy 
Spirit,  the  origin  and  source  of  spiritual  light  and  power. 
Finally,  as  the  crown  and  consummation  of  this  course  of  sym- 
bolic teaching  in  the  Holy  Place,  the  burning  incense  swung  in 
the  golden  censer  above  the  altar  and  directly  before  the  vail, 
was  beautifully  typical  of  the  prayers  of  the  saints,  and  of  the 
nearness  of  heaven  to  earth  under  the  reign  of  the  Spirit  of 
Christ.  Thus  the  symbols  of  Judaism  contain  in  solution  the 
substance  of  the  inward  spiritual  truths  of  Christianity,  to  be 
precipitated  and  manifested  when  the  consciousness  of  men 
under  the  training  of  a  progressive  revelation  was  sufficiently 
educated  to  comprehend  and  apply  its  principles.  When  the 
lesson  was  learned  the  essential  outwardness  of  the  old  cove- 
nant gave  way  to  the  essential  inwardness  of  the  new ;  sym- 
bolical representations,  and  letters  inscribed  on  tables  of  stone, 
and  signs  in  the  flesh,  went  out  by  the  incoming  of  the  life  of 
the  Spirit,  aptly  expressed  in  this  characteristic  word  of  the 
New  Age :  "  I  will  put  my  laws  into  their  mind,  and  write  them 


128 


THE  PE OGRESS  OF  EEVELATION. 


in  their  hearts,  and  I  will  be  to  them  a  God  and  they  shall  be 
to  me  a  people." 

3.  The  expanding  and  deepening  course  of  revelation  along 
certain  well  marked  lines  of  development  is  again  illustrated  in 
the  progress  of  doctrine  from  the  temporal  to  the  eternal,  from 
the  earthly  and  mortal  to  the  heavenly  and  immortal.  There 
are  no  distinct  traces  in  early  Hebrew  theology  of  the  doctrine 
of  an  individual  future  life  for  the  soul.  We  seek  in  vain  in 
the  earlier  books  of  the  Bible  for  the  conception  of  personal 
immortality,  unless  that  doctrine  should  be  held  to  be  legiti- 
mately involved  in  the  creation  of  man  in  God's  image  and  like- 
ness, and  in  the  relation  of  a  personal  God  which  revelation 
itself  implies.  If  the  germ  of  the  idea  can  be  traced  to  this 
source,  it  did  not  as  a  distinct  growth  root  itself  in  human  con- 
sciousness till  after  the  opening  of  the  prophetic  age  in  the  his- 
tory of  Israel.  Il^ewman  Smyth,  in  tracing  the  origin  and  devel- 
opment of  the  doctrine  of  personal  immortality  through  the 
Hebrew  revelation,  sums  up  the  discussion  in  a  passage  that  so 
admirably  suits  my  purpose  in  this  connection  that  I  cannot 
forbear  to  quote  it : 

"  The  continual  disappointment  of  their  history,  and  the 
visions  of  the  judgments  impending  upon  Israel  drove  the  later 
prophets  to  more  spiritual  interpretations  of  God's  great  provi- 
dential purposes,  and  hence  they  gained  more  elevated  concep- 
tions of  the  future  kingdom  of  God,  in  which  the  dead  shall  live 
again,  and  righteousness  receive  its  fitting  rewards.  The  truth 
involved  in  the  teaching  of  the  Pentateuch,  that  after  death  the 
soul  has  still  some  relation  to  the  living  God,  is  developed  more 
clearly  and  consciously  by  the  prophets ;  but  still  the  thought 
of  the  overcoming  of  death  for  the  individual  is  wrapt  up  in  the 
more  general  conception  of  the  final  triumph,  and  everlasting 
inheritance  of  the  sacred  community,  the  true  Israel.  It  is  the 
chosen  people  who  shall  be  ransomed  from  the  power  of  the 
grave.    Ephraim  shall  be  redeemed  from  death.    But  within 


THE  PBOGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


129 


tMs  hope  for  the  chosen  race  is  quietly  enfolded,  and  growing 
all  the  time,  the  hope  of  personal  immortality. 

"One  great  impulse  to  the  further  development  of  this  truth 
was  provided  by  the  experience  which  pressed  ever  more 
severely  upon  the  minds  of  men,  that  justice  is  not  always 
meted  out  in  this  world,  that  the  wicked  often  prosper  to  the 
last  day  of  their  lives,  and  that  the  righteous  do  not  receive 
here  the  full  rewards  of  their  labors.  This  old  riddle  of  human 
experience  cannot  be  solved  unless  we  bring  to  it  the  key  of 
this  truth  that  the  just  shall  live  again.  The  righteous  who 
have  died,  overborne  by  the  judgments  which  fell  upon  Israel — 
shall  not  they  have  part  in  the  final  triumph  of  the  true  Israel  ? 
So,  in  the  twenty-sixth  chapter  of  Isaiah,  the  prophet  struggles 
with  this  question  until  he  breaks  out  at  last  into  the  triumphal 
strain,  'Thy  dead  men  shall  live,  together  with  my  dead  body 
shall  they  arise.  Awake  and  sing,  ye  that  dwell  in  the  dust.' 
This  is  the  only  possible  solution  of  the  problem  of  life  ;  and  it  is 
the  conclusion  toward  which  the  history  of  Israel,  with  its 
increasing  burden  of  suffering  and  death,  pressed  on  to  Christ. 
In  the  storms  of  the  Maccabsean  age,  the  belief  in  immortality 
rose  more  brightly  than  ever  before.  The  prophet  Daniel, 
whose  words,  if  not  written  in  that  age,  were  certainly  for  that 
age,  holds  up  before  the  first  martyrs  of  that  beginning  of  per- 
secutions the  hope  of  shining  as  the  stars  for  ever  and  ever. 

'■  We  find,  then,  the  belief  that  there  is  existence  after  death 
involved  in  the  fundamental  religious  conception  of  Israel.  But 
the  truth  of  personal  immortality  is  a  truth  struggling  upward, 
a  growing  truth  of  the  Old  Dispensation ;  it  is  hardly  a  fully 
formed  hope,  or  ripened  doctrine.  It  is  in  the  Old  Testament, 
but  in  it  germinantly  and  potentially;  it  is  the  hope  of  the 
prophets  in  their  highest  moments  of  inspiration,  but  Christ 
must  bring  life  and  immortality  to  light  before  it  can  shine,  a 
steady  and  transfiguring  light  of  life,  for  the  world." 

This  blessed  truth  of  a  future  life  for  man,  so  vital  to  relig- 
ion, which  breaks  out  in  faint  and  fitful  gleams,  in  prophetic 


130 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATIOX. 


flashes  of  inspiration  against  the  background  of  prevailing 
darkness,  in  the  old  teaching,  shines  full  and  clear  in  the  teach- 
ing of  Christ,  and  finds  in  his  rising  its  visible  pledge  and  dem- 
onstration. 

I  have  thus  indicated  a  few,  out  of  many,  of  the  leading  lines 
of  development,  as  illustrative  specimens  of  the  progressive 
character  of  revelation,  that  the  mind  of  the  reader  may  be  able 
to  follow  me  in  what  I  shall  have  to  say  on  the  limits  and  char- 
acteristics, the  points  of  identity  and  the  points  of  distinction 
between  the  periods  of  revelation  known  as  the  three  dispensa- 
tions of  religion. 

UNITY  OF  THE  DISPENSATIONS. 

The  three  dispensations  of  religion,  known  as  the  Patri- 
archal, Jewish  and  Christian,  are  the  epochal  stages  that  mark 
the  progress  of  revelation  in  the  course  of  its  development.  The 
geography  of  redemption  embraces  the  planet,  its  chronology 
all  time,  its  history  is  moving  on  towards  completion  when  the 
words  of  the  apocalyptic  angel  shall  be  fulfilled,  "  time  is  and 
time  was,  but  time  shall  be  no  more,"  but  the  place  and  time 
and  record  of  revelation  are  more  limited.  The  origin  and  com- 
munication and  gradual  unfolding  of  what  we  understand  to  be 
the  word  of  Grod,  were  confined  to  a  single  nation  and  to  a 
period  of  about  four  thousand  j^ears.  The  Patriarchal  Dispen- 
sation extended  from  Adam  to  Moses,  and  lasted  twenty-five 
hundred  years.  The  Jewish  economy  reached  from  Moses  to 
Christ,  an  1  embraced  a  period  of  fifteen  hundred  years.  The 
Christian  dispensation  under  which  we  live,  extends  from  the 
birth  of  Christ  to  his  second  advent,  and  up  to  the  present  time 
comprehends  in  duration  a  period  of  eighteen  hundred  and 
ninety  years.  These  great  religious  cycles  in  the  history  and 
progress  of  revelation  have  been  characterized  by  important 
differences,  as  we  shall  see  further  on,  and  yet  in  respect  to 
essential  and  fundamental  principles,  the  truths  of  an  absolute 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


131 


religion,  a  thread  of  identity  and  continuity  runs  through  and 
binds  them  all  together  in  one.  The  conception  of  God  in  his 
unity,  personality  and  eternity  as  co-related  to  the  work  of 
creation,  the  redemption  of  Israel  and  the  salvation  of  the 
world,  is  not  only  "  the  golden  everlasting  chain  that  binds 
heaven  and  earth  and  main,"  but  it  binds  together  all  the  ages 
of  inspired  thought  as  essentially,  and  at  bottom,  one  age. 
The  ideal  of  human  character  expressed  in  the  thought  of  con- 
secration to  God  and  the  expression  of  that  consecration  by 
inward  holiness  and  outward  separation  from  sin  and  sinful 
men,  is  the  theme  of  Genesis  and  the  Apocalypse  and  all  the 
books  that  lie  between.  When  we  look  beneath  the  surface, 
the  fundamental  feature  of  Old  Testament  religion,  the  union 
of  devout  feeling  and  righteous  living,  constitutes  the  staple  of 
New  Testament  teaching,  the  burden  of  inspired  emphasis  of 
Apostles  and  Prophets,  with  the  higher  thought  added,  that  the 
life  of  personal  consecratio;i  is  to  find  its  highest  manifestation 
in  union  with  God,  in  love  that  goes  out  to  save  all  men  from 
evil.  The  inculcation  of  holiness,  the  proclamation  of  right- 
eousness, the  vindication  of  justice,  and  condemnation  of  sin, 
the  purification  of  human  hearts,  the  elevation  of  human  lives, 
the  medication  of  all  moral  diseases  by  the  inworking  of  God's 
Spirit,  is  the  theme  and  the  purpose  that  binds  into  a  glorious 
solidarity,  into  a  sublime  spiritual  unity,  the  ages,  the  books 
and  the  inspired  teachers  of  the  Bible. 

Under  each  and  all  of  these  great  religious  cycles  or  ages, 
three  things  have  been  unchangeably  necessary  to  salvation : 
Faith,  Obedience  and  Sacrifice.  The  first  recognizes  God's 
existence,  the  second  his  authority,  and  the  third  his  justice 
and  mercy.  These  are  fundamental  j^rincijiles,  and  are  of  the 
essence  of  religion  itself,  and  are  hence  of  universal  and  per- 
petual application.  In  themselves  they  can  neither  be  changed, 
intermitted,  nor  abolished.  Like  three  golden  bands  of  light 
they  run  parallel,  and  bind  all  the  ages  together  in  the  essential 
unity  of  fundamental  truth.    There  are  certain  great  central 


132 


THE  PBOOBESS  OF  REVELATION. 


arterial  lines  of  truth  running  through  the  whole  history  and 
prophecy  of  human  redemption,  beginning  at  the  fall  and 
ending  in  the  final  glorification  of  the  redeemed  in  heaven.  All 
that  is  most  vital  in  revelation  clusters  about  these  lines.  The 
unbroken  continuity  of  these  truths  from  one  end  of  the  Bible 
to  the  other,  I  have  elsewhere  illustrated  by  the  course  of  the 
Mississippi  River  through  the  central  valley  of  the  American 
continent.  The  great  river  takes  its  rise  in  the  North  and  runs 
like  a  silver  thread  through  the  New  World.  In  the  "West  it  is 
bounded  by  open  prairies,  in  the  South  it  winds  beneath  pre- 
cipitous heights,  rolls  through  marshy  swamps,  and  is  fringed 
here  and  there  by  dense  jungle  and  heavy  forests.  It  has  no 
regular  width,  depth,  or  straightness.  In  one  place  it  thunders 
through  a  mountain  gorge,  in  another  it  is  as  calm  and  tranquil 
as  the  upper  deep  on  a  summer's  day.  In  one  place  it  is 
narrow,  in  another  broad.  Here  it  is  shallow  enough  to  ford, 
yonder  it  is  deep  enough  to  float  the  great  Eastern.  Yet  from 
its  source  to  its  confluence  with  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  it  is  grad- 
ually augmented  by  tributary  streams.  So  these  great  truths 
of  infinite  love  rising  in  the  bowers  of  Eden,  rolled  on  through 
the  broad  expanse  of  human  history,  wound  their  course 
through  the  mountains  of  promise,  plunged  into  the  jungles  of 
prophecy,  and  re-appear  at  last  clothed  in  glory  in  the  gospel 
of  Jesus  Christ.  To  use  another  figure,  this  glorious  develop- 
ment of  divine  history  streaming  as  bands  of  colored  light 
across  the  ages,  is  resolved  back  into  the  original  white  ray 
in  the  person  of  Him  who  is  the  Light  of  the  world,  and  who, 
therefore,  becomes  the  all  and  in  all  of  our  faith  and  hope. 
Jesus  Christ  in  his  Messianic  offices  as  Teacher,  Atoner  and 
Ruler ;  in  his  personal  functions  as  the  Way,  the  Truth,  and 
the  Life  is  the  culmination  of  Old  Testament  prophecy  and  the 
peculiar  glory  of  New  Testament  history.  These  great  pivotal 
truths  that  run  through  the  revelation  of  God — the  universal 
sinfulness  of  humanity,  the  necessity  of  redemption  by  the 
grace  of  God,  the  possibility  of  deliverance  from  sin  and  death, 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


133 


the  immortality  of  man,  the  resurrection  of  the  dead,  and  a 
future  world  of  rewards  and  punishments — all  these  find  their 
fullest  meaning  and  profoundest  interpretation  in  the  incarna- 
tion, mission  and  death  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  binds  the 
two  Testaments  together  as  one  homogeneous  revelation,  not 
broken  and  inten-upted  by  the  dispensations,  but  only  enlarged 
and  varied  as  they  proceed.  An  intelligent  conception  of  the 
Christhood  of  Jesus  involves  as  its  first  logical  result  the  divine 
inspiration  of  the  Old  Testament.  In  the  Law,  the  Prophets 
and  the  Psalms,  there  are  distinct  prophetic  delineations  of  his 
Christly  character  and  functions.  The  Old  Testament  is  a 
prophetical  and  typical  representation  of  the  Messiah  and  of 
the  spirituality  of  his  reign ;  the  New  represents  him  historic 
ally  as  in  fact  the  manifestation  of  God  and  the  end  of  old 
covenant  revelations,  and  the  two  complement  and  harmonize. 
In  relation  to  the  former,  he  is  the  substance  of  its  shadows, 
the  fulfillment  of  its  prophecies,  the  consummation  of  its  types, 
the  realization  of  the  hopes  that  burned  in  the  bosom  of  patri- 
arch and  prophet,  the  burden  of  its  song,  the  soul  of  its  poetry. 
As  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  his  peculiar  New  Testament  rela- 
tionship, Christ  is  the  manifestation  of  the  Divine  nature. 
Confession  of  his  Sonship  involves  the  acceptance  of  the  New 
Testament  as  an  inspired  record  of  fact  and  doctrine.  "  These 
things  are  written,"  says  John,  "  that  you  might  br-lieve." 
Against  the  luminous  perspective  of  Messianic  prophecy,  the 
historical  Christ  stands  always,  and  with  ever  brightening 
effulgence,  as  knowledge  keeps  step  with  time,  stands  on  the 
sacred  page  a  perpetual  inspiration  transcendently  higher  than 
any  thing  human  has  yet  attained,  a  spotless  ideal,  before 
which  the  best  must  bow  in  humility.  When  Christ  is  accepted 
in  his  true  character,  we  acknowledge  allegiance  to  the  matchless 
ideal,  and  faith  in  the  hand  that  draws  the  picture,  the  prophetic 
records  of  the  Old,  and  the  evangelical  histories  of  the  New, 
and  all  inspired  productions,  based  upon  them.  Christ  is  the 
Son  of  God  in  a  three-fold  sense  ;  by  birth,  by  adoption  and  by 


134 


TEE  PROG  BESS  OF  REVELATION. 


inheritance.  He  is  tlie  Son  of  two  kings,  and  the  king  of  two 
worlds — the  Son  of  God  and  the  Son  of  David.  In  consequence 
he  is  the  heir  legitimate  of  two  thrones — the  throne  of  earth  and 
the  throne  of  heaven.  He  was  as  human  as  Adam,  as  Jewish 
as  David,  as  divine  as  God.  To  sj'mpathize  with  us  he  must  be 
human,  to  save  us  he  must  be  divine.  Take  away  his  human 
nature  and  he  is  not  man ;  take  away  his  divine  nature  and  he 
is  not  God.  In  either  case  he  is  not  the  Messiah,  the  Christ  of 
prophecy  and  history.  It  is  the  mystic  union  of  humanity  and 
divinity',  the  representation  of  universal  man,  and  the  universal 
God  that  makes  him  both  the  Son  of  Man  and  the  Son  of  God. 
It  is  worthy  of  remark  in  this  connection  that  the  sublime  and 
incomparable  structure  known  as  the  church  of  the  living  God 
is  built  upOn  this  central  and  all-embracing  truth,  for  whose 
enunciation  Peter  was  acknowledged  and  blessed.  "Blessed 
art  thou  Simon  Bar-jonah,  for  flesh  and  blood  hath  not  revealed 
this  unto  thee,  but  my  Father,  which  is  in  heaven."  The 
blending  streams  of  history,  biography,  prophecy,  typology, 
poetry  and  all  of  the  sublime  testimonies  to  God  and  righteous- 
ness in  the  Old  Testament  flow  into  the  widening  sea  of  the 
New  Age  here  at  Caesarea  Philippi,  and  the  mingling  of  the 
waters  attests  the  essential  oneness  of  God's  revelation  of  him- 
self to  man. 

Much  of  the  New  Testament  is  taken  from  the  Old,  and  much 
of  the  New  religion  was  the  outgrowth  and  fulfillment  of  that 
which  had  gone  before.  The  finest  imagery,  the  boldest  meta- 
phors, the  sublimest  symbols,  the  most  instructive  analogies, 
and  the  richest  spiritual  language  of  the  New  Testament  were 
framed  after  the  Old  Testament  and  literally  taken  from  that 
volume ;  in  which  suggestive  fact  we  find  an  illustration  of  the 
substantial  oneness  in  fundamentals  of  both  religions  and  both 
Testaments. 

The  quarry  that  furnishes  the  material  out  of  which  the 
divine  temple  is  to  be  constructed,  was  opened  in  the  Patri- 
archal age.    The  Jewish  dispensation  enlarged  the  quarry  and 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION.  135 

polished  the  stones.  In  the  gospel  of  the  New  Age  we  behold 
the  material  on  the  ground,  and  like  men  who  watch  the  rising 
of  some  great  edifice,  we  grow  familiar  with  the  outlines  and 
details  of  its  exterior  aspect.  In  the  Acts  of  Apostles  we  see 
the  doors  thrown  open  and  join  the  men  who  flock  into  it  as 
their  refuge  and  their  home.  In  the  Epistles  we  are  actually 
within  it,  sheltered  by  its  roof,  encompassed  by  its  walls  ;  we 
pass,  as  it  were,  from  chamber  to  chamber,  beholding  the  extent 
of  its  internal  arrangements  and  the  abundance  of  things  pro- 
vided for  our  use.  The  Apocalypse  witnesses  the  attempt  and 
the  failure  to  destroy  this  temple  of  God,  and  points  forward 
to  the  glorious  destiny  of  this  house,  not  made  with  hands,  in 
the  ages  to  come.  While  this  figure  of  a  temple  is  used  to 
illustrate  the  unity  of  revelation,  it  gives  us  a  very  distinct  inti- 
mation of  the  differences  between  the  dispensations  which  are 
neither  few  nor  unimportant. 

DISPENSATIONAL  DISTINCTIONS. 

One  of  the  principal  issues  between  our  reformatory  move- 
ment and  the  denominational  world  has  been  in  reference  to 
the  limits  and  characteristics  of  the  three  dispensations.  The 
denominations  have  ignored  and  denied  the  limitations  and  dis- 
tinctions that  define  and  separate  the  different  economies  of 
religion  revealed  in  the  Bible,  and  have  thus  landed  themselves 
into  dire  confusion  on  a  number  of  important  questions.  The 
underlying  unity  of  revelation  and  the  identity  of  spiritual  truth 
in  all  ages  has  been  confounded  with  the  growth  of  truth  along 
with  the  growth  of  men,  and  its  varied  forms  of  manifestation 
in  adaptation  to  the  needs  of  the  world,  and  its  progressive 
capacity  for  receiving  the  word  of  God.  The  truth  is  one  but 
the  forms  and  methods  of  its  revelation  and  application  to 
human  life  are  not  one.  The  diflerent  sections  of  a  progressive 
revelation  are  one  at  bottom  and  in  their  final  purpose,  but  there 
are  dispensational  distinctions  and  peculiarities  that  separate 


136 


THE  PBOGBESS  OF  BEVELATION. 


and  distinguish  these  economies  from  each  other.  We  have 
pointed  out  to  our  denominational  brethren  that  while  faith, 
obedience  and  atonement  by  blood  have  been  alike  necessary  in 
all  ages,  there  are  differences  in  the  manifestation  of  these  prin- 
ciples that  give  each  one  a  character  of  its  own.  In  the  truth 
to  be  believed  in  order  to  salvation,  the  blood  to  be  offered  and 
the  manner  of  its  offering,  and  the  principles  involved  in  the 
sacrifice,  and  in  the  nature  and  number  of  the  commands  to  be 
obeyed,  there  are  dissimilarities  both  important  and  striking 
that  Sunday-school  pupils  of  ordinary  intelligence  ought  to  be 
able  to  mention.  Patriarchs  and  Jews  were  required  to  believe 
in  God  only ;  the  Cliristian  believes  in  Christ  as  the  manifesta- 
tion of  God,  of  which  ancients  knew  nothing  except  in  promise. 
Judaism  was  a  theocracy,  with  God  as  the  exclusive  sovereign 
of  the  nation;  Christianity  is  a  Christocracy  in  which  Christ  is 
Lord  of  all  in  every  nation  that  fears  God  and  works  righteous- 
ness. "If  ye  believe  in  God,  believe  also  in  me,"  said  the 
Savior  to  his  Jewish  hearers.  Patriarchs  and  Jews  offered  the 
blood  of  animals  in  atonement  for  their  sins,  and  this  they  did 
continuously  from  year  to  year,  the  head  of  the  household  offi- 
ciating in  the  patriarchal  age  and  the  sons  of  Levi  among  the 
Jews ;  but  Christ,  the  Great  High  Priest  of  the  Christian  con- 
fession, has  for  us,  once  for  all,  offered  his  own  blood,  by  which 
he  has  perfected  forever  them  that  are  sanctified.  Paul  argues 
that  a  change  of  the  priesthood  necessarily  involves  a  change 
of  the  law,  and  hence  the  priestly  work  of  Christ  necessitated  a 
new  dispensation  and  a  new  law  of  admission  to  its  blessings 
and  privileges.  Through  Moses  and  the  prophets  there  came  to 
the  Hebrew  fathers  a  multitude  of  legal  and  ceremonial  pre- 
cepts which  they  were  required  to  obey ;  but  happily,  we  are 
free  from  all  these,  and  are  calle  I  upon  only  to  yield  submis- 
sion to  certain  great  moral  and  spiritual  commandments  which 
God  has  communicated  to  us  through  his  Son.  So  far  as  posi- 
tive precepts  and  the  externals  of  religion  were  concerned,  the 
old  statement  is  certainly  true  that  what  would  have  met  with 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


137 


divine  approval  in  a  patriarch,  would  have  brought  condemna- 
tion on  a  Jew ;  and  mce  versa,  and  probably  the  declaration  of 
a  modern  writer,  that  conduct  which  would  have  been  commend- 
able in  a  Jew  under  Mosaism  would  send  a  man  to  the  peni- 
tentiary under  the  reign  of  Christ,  will  not  be  considered  an 
exaggeration.  These  differences  were  found  in  the  investiga- 
tions of  the  fathers  of  our  reformation  to  be  of  such  importance 
in  a  correct  understanding  of  the  plan  of  salvation  that  it  was 
ascertained  to  be  a  fact  that  Christ  by  the  offering  of  himself  on 
the  cross  had  abolished  the  old  covenant,  and  made  provision 
for  the  introduction  of  a  new  and  better  covenant  established 
upon  better  promises.  (Heb.  8 :  6-13.)  The  characteristics  by 
which  this  new  covenant  was  differentiated  from  the  old,  made 
it  absolutely  certain  that  Christ  was  the  Lawgiver  of  a  new  age, 
and  that  Christianity  was  a  new  institution.  The  Pedobaptist 
assumption  that  the  Abrahamic,  Mosaic  and  Christian  covenants 
are  identical,  that  the  church  has  been  the  same  under  all  dis- 
pensations, and  that  Christians  sustain  the  same  relation  to  the 
Old  Testament  that  they  do  to  the  New,  is  shown  to  be  utterly 
false  by  the  following  characteristics  which  distinguish  Chris- 
tianity from  all  preceding  institutions  and  covenants.    It  has 

I.  A  New  Lawgiver.  The  Jewish  economy,  as  just  indi- 
cated, was  a  theocracy  with  Grod  as  its  King,  and  Moses  as  the 
representative  of  divine  authority  on  earth.  Tlie  Christian  dis- 
pensation is  a  Christocracy  with  Christ  as  the  Prophet,  Priest 
and  King,  the  sole  earthly  exponent  and  embodiment  of  divine 
authority.  The  law  came  by  Moses ;  but  grace  and  truth  by 
Jesus  Christ.  The  supremacy  of  Christ  as  the  authorized 
teacher  and  ruler  of  the  Christian  age  was  predicted  by  Moses 
himself.  (Acts  3:  22,  23.)  In  demonstrating  the  superior  excel- 
lency of  the  Christian  religion  in  comparison  with  Judaism, 
Paul's  central  and  most  telling  point  was  the  incomparable 
superiority  of  its  lawgiver  and  founder  to  that  of  the  old 
economy.  (Heb.  1 :  1-13 ;  3 :  1-6.)  On  the  mount  of  transfigu- 
ration when  Jehovah  said  from  the  shining  cloud,  ^'■This  is  my 


138 


TEE  PROORESS  OF  REVELATION. 


heloved  son  in  whom  I  am  well  pleased,  hear  ye  him,"  Moses 
and  Elijah,  the  great  lawgiver  and  prophet  of  the  old  dispensa- 
tion, formally  abdicated  the  throne  of  legislation  and  instruc- 
tion, casting  their  crowns  of  authority  at  the  Savior's  feet. 
Henceforth  Christ  alone  is  to  be  heard.  The  final  transfer  of 
supreme  authority  and  power  to  Jesus  the  Christ  is  on  the  eve 
of  his  exaltation  to  the  right  hand  of  the  Father  in  the  prelude 
to  the  great  commission,  the  basis  of  that  sublime  document, 
and  the  foundation  of  the  Christian  society :  "all  authority  is 

GIVEN  UNTO  ME  IN  HEAVEN  AND  IN  EARTH.''     Surely  We  CanUOt 

regard  this  difference  between  the  two  economies  as  other  than 
of  vital  importance. 

II.  A  New  Priesthood.  The  writer  of  the  Hebrews  declares 
that  with  a  change  of  the  priesthood,  there  is  of  necessity  a 
change  of  the  law.  (Heb.  7:  12.)  If  there  is  a  new  priesthood 
and  a  new  law  under  the  reign  of  Christ,  the  old  Pedobaptist 
fiction  of  the  identity  of  the  covenants  is  not  only  ridiculous,  but 
as  these  items  comprise  all  that  is  vitally  necessary  to  a  new 
covenant,  is  incomprehensibly  stupid.  The  father  of  the  family 
was  the  ofiiciating  priest  under  the  Patriarchal  dispensation. 
The  sons  of  Levi  discharged  the  priestly  function  under  the 
reign  of  Mosaism.  Both  off'ered  the  blood  of  animals  and  dis- 
charged their  functions  temporarily.  But  Jesus  Christ  is  the 
Great  High  Priest  of  our  confession,  who  hath  an  unchangeable 
priesthood,  and  avIio  by  his  own  blood  has  made  one  effectual 
offering  for  sin.  The  new  priesthood  being  fundamentally  differ- 
ent from  the  old,  necessitating  a  change  in  the  law,  the  basis  of 
the  covenant,  it  is  beyond  the  range  of  possibility  that  the  two 
should  be  identical,  or  that  the  church  of  Christ  should  have 
any  actual  existence  prior  to  the  advent  of  Christ  and  the  begin- 
ning of  his  priestly  ofiice.  His  priesthood  did  not  begin  till 
after  his  return  to  heaven,  and  the  acceptance  of  the  offered 
blood  by  the  eternal  Father  (Heb.  8 :  4,  11,  14),  which  was  the 
inaugural  act  in  the  High  Priesthood  of  Jesus  and  the  crowning- 
qualification  for  the  headship  of  the  church  which  was  estab- 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


139 


lished  immediately  afterwards  on  the  Pentecost  that  followed 
the  ascension. 

III.  New  Mediator.  A  mediator  is  one  who  stands 
between  parties  at  variance  for  the  purpose  of  effecting  a  recon- 
ciliation ;  he  is  hence  an  interpreter,  a  reconciler,  an  internun- 
cio, an  intercessor.  "  In  all  the  ages  and  in  all  parts  of  the 
world,"  says  Calmet,  "there  has  constantly  prevailed  such  a 
sense  of  the  infinite  holiness  of  the  Supreme  Deity,  with  so  deep 
a  conviction  of  the  imperfections  of  human  nature  and  the  guilt 
of  man,  as  to  deter  worshipers  from  coming  directly  into  the 
presence  of  a  Being  so  awful ;  and  recourse  has,  therefore,  been 
had  to  mediators.  Among  the  Sabians,  the  celestial  intelli- 
gences were  constituted  mediators  ;  among  other  idolaters,  their 
various  idols ;  and  this  notion  still  prevails  in  Hindostan  and 
elsewhere.  Sacrifices  were  thought  to  be  a  kind  of  mediators, 
and  in  short  there  has  been  a  universal  feeling,  a  sentiment 
never  forgotten  of  the  necessity  of  an  interpreter  or  mediator 
between  God  and  man,"  Under  the  old  covenant  the  office  of 
mediator  was  filled  primarily  by  Moses.  (Ex.  20:  19-21,24; 
Gral.  3:  19,  20).  After  him  it  appears  the  high  priest  discharged 
the  duties  of  mediator,  standing  as  he  did,  between  God  and 
the  people,  especially  on  the  day  of  atonement.  (Lev.  24).  But 
under  the  new  and  better  covenant  there  is  but  one  mediator, 
between  God  and  man,  the  man  Christ  Jesus.  (1  Tim.  2 :  5). 
"  But  now  hath  he  obtained  a  more  excellent  ministry,  by  how 
much  also  he  is  (present  tense,)  the  mediator  of  a  better  cove- 
nant which  hath  been  (past  tense)  enacted  upon  better  prom- 
ises." (Heb.  8:  6).  This  mediator  stands  as  a  guarantee  on  the 
part  of  God  that  he  will  graciously  fulfill  his  promises  (ch.  7 : 
22)  and  on  behalf  of  man  he  appears  before  God  not  only  to 
plead  his  cause,  but  also  to  make  expiation  for  our  sins  by  the 
offering  of  his  precious  blood.  This  is  another  difference  suffi- 
ciently radical  of  itself  to  sweep  away  the  false  and  pernicious 
assumption  that  the  old  imperfect  covenant  is  identical  with 
the  new  and  better  one. 


140 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


IV.  A  New  Foundation.  The  distinctive  and  peculiar 
proposition  of  the  Christian  religion  is  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth 
is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  the  Messiah  of  the 
prophets,  and  the  promised  seed  of  Abraham.  On  this  funda- 
mental fact  the  Christian  Church  and  the  new  covenant  are 
founded.  The  church  of  Christ  could  never  have  had  existence 
but  for  the  pre-existence  of  this  proposition  as  an  accomplished 
reality.  "  Thou  art  Peter  and  on  this  rock  I  will  build  my 
church,  and  the  gates  of  hades  shall  not  prevail  against  it." 
(Matt.  16  :  18).  "  Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than  that  is 
laid  which  is  Jesus  Christ."  (1  Cor.  3:  11).  But  the  Abrahamic 
covenant,  consummated  on  its  natural  side  in  the  organization 
at  Sinai,  was  based  on  the  temporal  and  fleshly  promises  made 
to  Abraham  in  the  covenants  of  circumcision  and  that  of  the 
land  inheritance.  Has  any  man  the  hardihood  to  affirm  that  the 
Sinaic  covenant,  or  any  of  the  preceding  developments  on  the 
same  line,  were  based  on  the  proposition  of  the  incarnation  that 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  was  the  Messiah,  the  Christed  Son  of  the 
living  Grod  ?  Surely  not.  Is  there  not,  then,  a  wide  and  irrecon 
cilable  difference  between  an  institution  based  upon  that  sub- 
lime proposition  and  one  founded  upon  a  catenation  of  temporal 
and  national  promises  to  the  fleshly  seed  of  Abraham,  incor- 
porated in  a  mixed  constitution  of  religion  and  politics  ?  If 
not,  there  are  no  two  things  in  the  world  of  which  an  important 
difference  could  be  predicated. 

V.  New  Subjects.  In  the  eighth  chapter  of  Hebrews,  Paul 
with  great  clearness  points  out  the  peculiar  points  of  distinction 
between  the  subjects  of  the  two  covenants.  The  characteristics 
and  provisions  of  this  new  covenant  are  not  only  radically  dif- 
ferent from  the  old,  but  are  such  as  necessarily  to  exclude 
infants,  the  unregenerate,  and  all  irresponsible  persons  from  its 
membership. 

1.  Its  subjects  were  to  have  the  divine  laws  put  into  their 
minds,  and  written  in  their  hearts  (v.  10).  This  is  not  true  of 
the  former  covenant,  for  it  contained  unconscious  infants  who 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


141 


were  incapable  of  comprehending  the  law,  and  bad  men  who 
rejected  and  disregarded  its  moral  provisions,  and  hence  did  not 
have  it  written  in  the  heart  and  conscience. 

2.  The  members  of  this  covenant  will  not  find  it  necessary 
to  teach  their  neighbors  and  brethren  to  know  the  Lord,  for  all 
who  are  subjects  of  it  shall  know  him  from  the  least  to  the 
greatest,  (v.  10).  God-knowledge  is  the  first  condition  of 
admission  to  the  blessings  of  this  dispensation.  But  there  were 
infants  and  irresponsible  persons  in  the  old  economies  who  did 
not  know  the  Lord  and  had  to  be  taught.  They  are,  therefore, 
eifectually  excluded  by  this  second  provision  from  membership 
in  the  new  institution. 

3.  Of  the  subjects  of  this  new  covenant  it  is  said :  "  I  will 
be  merciful  to  their  unrighteousness,  and  their  sins  and  their 
iniquities  will  I  remember  no  more."  (v.  12).  But  the  subjects 
of  the  old  covenant  had  their  sins  remembered  every  year,  and 
these  were  not  finally  and  plenarily  forgiven,  till  Christ  died  on 
the  cross,  besides  infants  and  those  who  were  not  morally 
responsible,  of  which  the  Abrahamic  and  Sinaic  covenants  were 
full,  had  no  unrighteousness  to  be  merciful  to  and  no  iniquities 
to  be  forgiven.  The  covenant  of  circumcision  was  in  the  flesh  ; 
that  at  Mount  Sinai  was  inscribed  on  tables  of  stone  ;  that  from 
Mount  Zion  on  the  fleshly  tables  of  the  heart.  The  members  of 
the  new  covenant  were  the  subjects  of  a  second  birth  purely 
spiritual  in  its  character ;  this  sine  qua  non  of  membership  in 
the  church  of  Christ  was  never  made  a  qualification  for  admis- 
sion to  the  privileges  of  any  covenant  under  former  dispensa- 
tions. The  only  true  condition  was  a  birth  of  flesh  in  the  nat- 
ural line  of  Abraham's  seed.  Here  is  a  passage  that  cuts  up 
root  and  branch  of  the  whole  Pedobaptist  theory  of  the  identity 
of  the  dispensations  and  their  representative  covenants,  if  there 
were  nothing  else  in  the  Bible  on  the  subject :  "  He  came  unto 
his  own  and  they  that  were  his  own  received  him  not.  But  as 
many  as  received  him,  to  them  gave  he  the  right  to  become  chil- 
dren of  God,  even  to  them  that  believed  on  his  name,  who  were 


142 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


born  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of  the  flesh,  nor  of  the  will  of 
man  ;  but  of  God." 

VI.  New  Terms  of  Membeeship.  The  conditions  of  mem- 
bership to  the  old  covenant  were  to  be  born  in  Abraham's  house 
or  be  bought  with  his  money  (Gen.  17:  12,  13).  The  basis  of 
membership  under  all  the  forms  of  these  ancient  covenants  was 
absolutely  and  purely  flesh  and  blood.  Neither  faith,  nor  obe- 
dience, nor  piety  was  required  as  a  condition  of  entrance. 
Spirituality  was  an  accident  and  not  essential  to  membership  in 
these  elder  dispensations.  On  the  contrary,  the  Savior  said  to 
Nicodemus,  a  distinguished  member  of  the  old  flesh  and  blood 
covenant :  "Except  a  man  be  born  again  he  cannot  see  the 
kingdom  of  God."  A  birth  of  water  and  Spirit,  the  renovation 
of  the  spiritual  nature,  the  purification  of  the  heart  and  immer- 
sion into  the  name  of  the  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit  as  an  act 
of  obedience  to  divioe  authority,  were  the  conditions  on  which 
membership  in  the  church  of  Christ  was  to  be  enjoyed.  Taking 
proselytes  and  the  natural  descendants  of  Abraham  together, 
the  only  conditions  that  ever  gave  membership  to  the  Abra- 
hamic  and  Mosaic  covenants  were  :  (1)  Flesh.  (2)  Property. 
(3)  Circumcision.  The  terms  of  induction  into  the  new  cove- 
nant, the  church  of  Christ,  the  Dispensation  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
are :  (a)  Faith,  (b)  Repentance,  (c)  Baptism.  "  He  that 
believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved."  (Mark  16:  16). 
"  Repent  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins."  (Acts  2:  38).  "And  as  many 
as  gladly  received  his  word  were  baptized,  and  the  same  day 
there  were  added  unto  them  about  three  thousand  souls."  (Acts 
2  :  41).  "  Many  of  the  Corinthians  hearing,  believed,  and  were 
baptized."  (Acts  18 :  8).  These  distinctions  touch  the  most 
vital  questions  of  salvation  and  the  divine  life  that  follows. 

Vn.  A  New  Name,  a  New  Life,  and  a  New  Destestt. 
The  new  creation  in  Christ,  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  which  was 
an  original  conception  with  Jesus,  a  unique  institution  of  which 
the  world  had  had  no  previous  intimation,  with  its  new  king, 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION.  143 

new  priesthood,  new  mediatorship,  new  creed,  new  subjects,  new 
conditions  of  membership  and  new  spiritual  forces  had  conferred 
upon  it  new  and  appropriate  designations  adequately  descriptive 
of  its  characteristics,  while  the  three  R's  of  the  divine  plan. 
Ruin  by  Sin,  Redemption  in  Christ  and  Regeneration  by  the 
Holy  Spirit  imparted  a  new  life  to  the  believer  with  its  natural 
consummation  of  a  better  hope  and  a  brighter  destiny.  The 
church  of  Christ,  the  Christian  Dispensation,  therefore,  is  a  new 
institution  ;  its  fellowship  is  a  new  fellowship  ;  its  proclamation 
is  a  new  proclamation ;  its  spiritual  facts  and  forces  are  a  new 
manifestation  of  the  truth  ;  it  is  the  new  and  living  way  differ- 
ing widely  from  the  old,  which  in  its  outward  forms  stood,  in 
meats  and  drinks  and  divers  washings  and  carnal  ordinances, 
imposed  on  them  till  the  time  of  reformation. 

BESULTS  OF  IGNORING  A  CHANGE  OF  DISPENSATIONS. 

The  tap-root  of  much  of  the  false  theology  and  many  of  the 
unscriptural  practices  of  sectarianism,  its  misconception  of  the 
plan  of  salvation,  and  the  illogical  and  discordant  methods  of 
interpretation  that  characterize  its  most  popular  forms,  is  the 
persistent  confounding  of  the  dispensations.  The  evangelical 
theologian  and  preacher  of  the  average  type  recognizes  no  dis- 
tinction between  the  functions  of  the  two  Testaments,  acknowl- 
edges no  changes  in  the  divine  constitutions  and  covenants  as 
they  run  through  the  ages,  knows  but  one  organized  religion  in 
all  time,  but  one  age,  one  authority,  and  one  platform  of  revela- 
tion ;  he  regards  the  promises  to  the  patriarchs,  the  institutions 
of  Mosaism,  the  imprecations  of  the  psalms,  the  positive 
precepts  of  the  Old  Testament  and  the  preparatory  instructions 
of  the  law  and  the  prophets,  as  equally  authoritative  and 
equally  binding  on  the  Christian  with  the  teachings  of  the  new 
and  better  covenant  under  Christ  and  the  Apostles.  If  he  is 
called  upon  to  give  direction  to  sinners  inquiring  the  way  of 
salvation,  he  is  as  apt  to  answer  them  from  Habakkuk  or  the 


144 


TEE  PROOBESS  OF  REVELATION. 


Song  of  Solomon,  from  Leviticus  or  the  book  of  Ecclesiastes  as 
from  the  inspired  book  of  conversions  under  Christ,  the  Acts  of 
Apostles  !  Under  such  ignorance  of  the  Bible  and  its  dispensa- 
tional  land-marks,  so  obvious  to  men  Vv'ho  have  learned  to 
rightly  divide  the  word  of  truth,  the  sacred  volume  becomes  an 
incoherent  jumble  of  fragmentary  texts  to  be  disported  like 
balls  and  hammered  by  exegetical  bats  and  tossed  about  by 
preachers  in  whatsoever  direction  their  sectarian  prejudice  and 
theological  bias  may  dispose  them  to  aim,  under  whose  manipu- 
lation the  books  of  Chronicles  are  as  likely  to  become  the  field 
for  Christian  instruction  and  edification  in  the  duties  and  privi- 
leges conferred  by  the  gospel  as  the  Apostolic  epistles  written 
expressly  for  the  purpose. 

The  Roman  Catholic  and  the  ritualistic  high  churchman,  and 
all  of  the  advocates  of  the  ceremonial  and  sacramentarian  con- 
ceptions of  religion,  in  blissful  ignorance  of  the  abrogation  of 
the  old  dispensation,  go  back  to  the  Old  Testament  and  an 
effete  Judaism  for  their  priest-craft,  for  the  caste  spirit  of 
officialism  that  creates  the  hateful  and  anti-Christian  distinction 
between  the  clergy  and  the  laity.  They  go  back  for  their 
scenic  worship,  ritualistic  flummery,  priestly  exclusiveness  in 
the  control  of  religious  affairs,  and  for  the  substitution  of  a 
hollow  externalism  in  place  of  the  spiritual  religion  of  the  New 
Testament. 

The  priestly  conception  of  the  ministry  is  distinctively 
Judaic  and  pagan,  and  therefore  anti-Christian.  It  displaces 
the  true  spiritual  ministry  of  the  church  with  the  caste  spirit  of 
paganism  masquerading  in  the  forms  and  under  the  sanctions 
of  Judaism  and  the  Old  Testament,  and  worst  of  all  it  entirely 
destroys  the  beautiful  New  Testament  doctrine  of  universal 
Christian  priesthood,  in  which  every  disciple  of  the  Lord  is  a 
consecrated  priest  to  offer  up  spiritual  sacrifices,  acceptable  to 
God  by  Jesus  Christ.  (Rev.  1 :  5,  6  ;  1  Pet.  2 :  5-9).  Priestism 
and  sacramentarianism  are  the  products  of  Judaism,  and  spring 
from  that  conception  of  religion  on  which  its  worst  abuses  were 


THE  PROGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


145 


founded.  Pharisaism,  with  its  love  of  externals  and  its  disre- 
gard of  the  spiritual  and  the  vital  in  religion,  is  the  ripened 
fruit  of  priest-craft.  The  chief  mistake  of  the  Judaizers  of 
Paul's  time,  who  gave  him  so  much  trouble,  was  their  belief 
that  Christianity  was  not  a  new  spiritual  creation  in  Christ,  but 
only  an  inspired  supplement  to  Judaism,  an  appendix,  simply, 
to  the  Old  Testament  revelation  through  Moses  and  the  prophets. 
They  found  circumcision  in  both  of  the  old  dispensations ;  it 
was  sanctioned  by  divine  authority  and  confirmed  by  the 
inspired  history  of  both  economies,  and  they  insisted  on  its 
incorporation  in  Christianity,  not  only  as  a  condition  of  salva- 
tion to  the  Jews,  but  to  the  Gentiles  also.  There  was  an 
irrepressible  conflict  between  the  new  gospel  of  faith  and  the 
old  gospel  of  legalism  on  this  question,  between  those  who 
believed  the  kingdom  of  God  to  consist  of  external  rites  and 
ceremonies,  and  those  who  maintained  its  essential  elements  to 
consist  in  righteousness  and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Spirit. 
The  coffin  of  Judaism  was  the  cradle  of  Christianit}^,  but  the 
cerements  of  the  old  Jewish  corpse  hung  around  the  body  of 
the  infant  gospel  till  the  natural  growth  of  the  latter  rendered 
it  no  longer  possible  for  it  to  be  holden  of  the  elements  of  death. 
Paul's  greatest  work  for  humanity  lay  in  his  successful  resis- 
tance to  the  Judaization  of  the  gospel.  The  great  Apostle  was 
the  God-commissioned  and  God-equipped  agent,  raised  up  at  a 
critical  juncture  in  the  history  of  the  church,  the  man  and  the 
moment  coming  together  as  they  always  do  in  great  providen- 
tial movements,  to  force  the  shackles  of  a  Judaizing  bondage 
and  to  deliver  the  truth  from  its  Jewish  entanglements,  that  it 
might  be  handed  down  to  future  generations  unimpaired  and 
unincumbered  with  dead  forms  and  arbitrary  limitations,  as 
Christ  himself  gave  it  to  the  world. 

Paul's  work  is  not  yet  done,  for  the  modern  Judaizer,  igno- 
rant like  his  spiritual  ancestors  of  a  change  of  dispensations,  is 
still  getting  in  his  work.  The  union  of  church  and  State,  the 
abomination  that  has  made  desolate  the  holy  place  since  the 

10 


146 


THE  PROORESS  OF  REVELATION. 


supposed  conversion  of  Constantine  the  Great,  is  the  work  of  a 
carnalizing  and  Judaizing  element  in  whose  conception  the 
church  of  Christ  Avas  modeled  after  the  politico-religious  com- 
monwealth of  the  old  Jewish  theocracy  with  its  mixed  national 
membership  of  good,  bad  and  indifferent.  Judaism  had  both  a 
political  and  a  moral  constitution  between  whose  provisions 
there  was  no  distinction,  and  hence  all  who  were  born  in  the 
State  were  entitled  to  membership  in  the  church.  A  Christian 
Church  constructed  on  this  model  opens  the  Hood  gates  of  car- 
nality, wipes  out  the  line  of  demarkation  between  the  church 
and  the  world,  destroys  the  spiritual  character  and  basis  of  its 
fellowship,  puts  the  dagger  to  the  heart  of  the  New  Testament 
doctrine  of  an  exclusively  regenerated  and  sanctified  church 
membership  under  the  dispensation  of  the  Spirit,  and  puts  the 
world  back  thirty-five  hundred  years  in  the  development  of  the 
scheme  of  redemption.  The  evil  fruits  of  this  monstrous  dogma 
are  seen  in  the  State  churchism  of  Europe  for  the  last  thousand 
years,  and  its  religious  condition  to-day.  The  Bible  cannot  be 
correctly  interpreted  and  its  religion  rightly  understood  with 
such  ignorance  of  the  divine  movements  in  history,  and  the 
changes  that  have  taken  place  of  necessity  in  the  growth  of  the 
ages. 

Infant  rantism,  the  visible  bond  between  the  church  and 
the  State  where  that  nefarious  and  carnalizing  union  exists,  and 
a  meaningless  ceremony  where  it  does  not,  is  another  inference 
of  the  Judaizing  logician  of  Protestantism.  The  evangelical 
Judaizer,  while  eschewing  the  Romish  efibrt  to  establish  an 
ofiicial  priesthood  on  the  basis  of  Leviticism  and  sacraraenta- 
rianism  from  the  old  Scriptures,  goes  back  with  the  Romanist 
and  the  Ritualist  and  the  State  church  advocate,  and  obtains  his 
infant  baptism  from  Abraham  and  Moses  and  the  carnal  cove- 
nants of  the  past.  In  strictness  of  speech  he  goes  back  to  the 
Old  Testament  for  his  infants,  and  when  he  has  found  them 
comes  rejoicing  into  the  New  in  search  of  baptism  and  the 
church.    As  the  pestiferous  Judaizers  of  Paul's  time  obtained 


THE  PE OGRESS  OF  REVELATION. 


U7 


their  circumcision  from  one  dispensation  and  found  their  Gen- 
tiles in  another  and  attempted  by  a  smart  coicp  de  main  to  bring 
them  together  in  the  Christian  Church  in  order  to  the  salvation 
of  both,  especially  the  former — they  were  more  anxious  to  save 
circumcision  than  they  were  the  Gentiles — so  the  rantizer  of 
infants  finding  his  babes  in  the  carnal  and  temporal  family  and 
national  institutions  of  Abraham  and  Moses  and  the  ordinance 
of  baptism  in  the  Christian  age,  endeavors  by  one  of  the  most 
inglorious  sophisms  ever  perpetrated  on  any  subject^  to  bring 
them  together  in  the  church  of  Christ.  These  fundamental 
errors  of  Romanism  and  Protestantism,  priest-craft,  ritualism, 
sacramentarianism,  legalism.  State  churchism  and  infant  bap- 
tism, will  never  cease  to  blast  the  spirituality  of  the  church,  to 
carnalize  the  kingdom  of  God,  and  to  make  the  Bible  an  unin- 
telligible book,  till  the  distinctions  I  have  insisted  on  are  clearly 
perceived,  and  the  newness  of  the  gospel  in  many  of  its  facts, 
forces  and  conditions  is  more  generally  understood.  No  greater 
service  has  been  performed  for  the  whole  of  Christendom  during 
this  century  than  the  work  of  our  reformatory  movement,  in 
pointing  out  and  emphasizing  these  dispensational  difierences 
in  the  progress  of  revelation,  as  absolutely  necessary  to  a  cor- 
rect interpretation  of  the  Bible  and  the  religion  which  it  teaches. 
In  doing  this  we  have  not  ignored  the  claims  of  the  Okl  Testa- 
ment or  disparaged  its  value.  Enough  has  already  been  said 
to  show  our  belief  in  the  Old  Testament  as  an  inspired  book, 
filled  with  illustrious  examples  of  faith  and  piety  and  heroic 
devotion  to  truth  and  righteousness. 

The  fact  is  cheerfully  acknowledged  that  types  and  symbols 
and  great  spiritual  developments  furnish  a  large  amount  of  pro- 
phetic and  confirmatory  evidence  of  the  truth  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment. Its  ordinances  and  positive  institutions,  however,  and 
much  of  its  historical  teachings,  are  not  authoritative  under 
Christ  or  binding  on  the  Christian.  They  sprang  out  of  the  con- 
ditions and  circumstances  of  their  own  age,  and  ceased  to  be  with 
its  abrogation.    The  New  Testament  is  pre-eminently  the  book 


148 


THE  PBOGBESS  OF  EEYELATION. 


of  authority  and  guidance  under  the  Christian  dispensation, 
because  it  contains  the  constitution  and  revelation  of  the  New 
Age.  It  contains  the  last  will  and  testament  of  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  on  the  question  of  human  redemption,  the  history 
of  the  incarnation,  the  record  of  the  atonement,  the  proofs  of  the 
resurrection,  the  ministrations  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  the  work 
of  the  Apostles  in  building  the  Christian  Church  and  providing 
for  instruction  in  all  things  that  pertain  unto  life  and  godliness, 
and  is  hence  the  source  of  religious  knowledge,  the  infallible, 
spiritual  directory,  and  the  only  rule  of  faith  and  practice  for 
all  men  from  Christ  to  the  millennium.  "When  the  peculiar 
functions  of  the  Testaments  in  their  relations  to  each  other,  and 
to  the  Christian  world,  are  thoroughly  understood,  the  Judaizing 
errors  indicated  will  pass  away  and  both  the  science  of  Biblical 
interpretation  and  the  way  of  salvation  will  become  so  plain 
that  a  wayfaring  man  though  he  be  a  simpleton  need  not  err 
therein. 


Isaiah  Boone  Grubbs  was  the  seventh  son  of  John  T.  Grubbs,  Avho  mar- 
ried Susan  1).  rurrington,  both  of  whom  were  of  Louisa  county,  Va.  They 
came  to  Kentucky  about  the  year  liSol,  and  the  subject  of  this  slictch  was 
born  May  'M,  IHoo,  near  Trenton,  Todd  county,  but  was  reared  in  Christian 
county,  near  IIopi<insville.  lie  submitted  to  tlie  claims  of  tlie  Messiaii  at  tlie 
age  of  eighteen,  and  when  lie  was  nineteen,  in  tlie  spring  of  1852,  Jie  com- 
menced preaching,  by  a  unanimous  call  of  tiie  congregation  worsliiping  at 
Pembroke,  with  which  he  was  identified.  For  a  more  tiiorougii  preparation 
for  his  work,  he  entered,  the  same  year,  Oakland  Institute  in  [Montgomery 
county,  Tenn.,  then  conducted  by  A.  L.  Johnson  and  A.  J.  Wyatt.  Under 
their  able  instruction  iie  continued  two  years,  after  which  he  taught  about 
seven  months  in  Todd  county,  and  in  the  fall  of  Ls.jo  went  to  Bethany  Col- 
lege, Va.,  where  he  graduated  with  honor  July  4,  1857. 

Returning  to  his  native  State,  he  married  Olympia  Q.  Beauchamp,  of 
Elkton,  Todd  county,  on  the  1st  day  of  October  of  that  year.  In  the  liegin- 
ning  of  1858,  he  removed  to  Paducah,  where  lie  preached  and  taught  for 
eighteen  months,  the  church  being  weak  at  that  time.  In  the  summer  of 
185y,  he  went  to  Nortliern  Kentucky,  and  was  called  to  preach  for  the  large 
and  flourishing  church  at  Eminence,  between  Louisville  and  Frankfort. 
jVear  the  close  of  18GU,  during  the  excitement  which  preceded  the  stormy 
days  of  the  civil  war,  lie  removed  to  Scott  county,  wiiere  he  remained  in 
quiet  till  toward  the  conclusion  of  that  tremendous  conliict,  preaching  for 
three  or  four  churches. 

Being  apiiointed  to  the  chair  of  Greek  and  Latin  and  Higher  J.Iathe- 
matics  in  Flemiugsburg  College,  he  removed  to  that  town  in  18(i4,  and 
taught  there  for  fifteen  months,  preaching  meanwhile  for  the  churches  at 
Elizaville  and  Poplar  Plains  alternately.  Resigning  his  professorshii),  he 
continued  to  preach  for  these  churches,  locating  with  the  church  at  Poplar 
Plains.  In  the  beginning  of  180'.*,  by  the  unanimous  voice  of  the  cliurcli  at 
Eminence,  he  was  re-called  to  preach  for  that  congregation,  and  had  a  happy 
and  prosperous  ministry  there  of  four  years.  It  was  during  his  residence 
here  (Jan.  17,  187U),  while  striving  to  organize  a  congregation  at  Cave  City, 
that  one  of  the  most  fearful  cyclones  that  ever  passed  over  the  Continent 
swept  away  all  that  part  of  the  town  Avhere  he  Avas  lodging,  grinding  the 
house  in  wiiich  he  was  sleeping  to  splinters,  tor  the  most  part,  and  (lii>iiping 
him  some  hundred  yards  away.  JNluch  bruised,  but  receiving  no  internal 
injury,  he  soon  recovered  sulliciently  to  return  to  his  home,  and  in  a  few 
W(;eks  resume  his  work.  Receiving  a  call  from  the  Floyd  and  Chestnut 
Street  Church  in  Louisville,  he  commenced  there  a  successful  ministry  Jan- 
uary, 187.'),  which  he  prosecuted  for  three  years,  when  by  the  urgent  request 
of  the  former  etlitors  of  the  Apostolic  Times  he  agreed  to  take  editorial  ciiarge 
of  that  paper.  I{euio\  ing  to  Lexington,  he  commenced  that  important  work 
in  the  beginning  of  l87ti,  and  associated  with  hiuiselt  the  lamented  S.  A. 
Kelley  and  F.  G.  Allen.  These  labors  he  continued  about  eighteen  months, 
and  in  the  summer  of  1877  was  elected  professor  of  Sacred  Literature  ami 
Homiletics  in  the  College  of  the  Bible,  in  which  important  position  he  has 
now  labored  for  fourteen  years. 

Prof.  Grubbs  is  of  delicate  health,  but  in  addition  to  all  the  labor  men- 
tioned in  the  foregoing,  he  has  contributed  many  able  articles  to  our 
jjcriodical  literature,  and  has  an  established  reputation  as  a  clear  and  forcible 
writer. 


I.  IJ.  GKUBBS. 


THE  DOCTRINE  OF  JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 

PROF.  I.  B.  GRUBBS. 
FUNDAMENTAL  IDEA  IN  JUSTIFICATION. 

WHO  shall  lay  anything  to  the  charge  of  God's  elect?  It  is 
God  that  justifies  ;  who  is  he  that  shall  condemn  ?  It  is 
Christ  Jesus  that  died,  yea,  rather,  that  was  raised  from  the 
dead,  who  is  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  who  also  makes  interces- 
sion for  us."    Rom.  8  :  33,  34. 

In  the  form  of  interrogation  it  is  emphatically  denied  that 
any  one  can  successfully  bring  a  charge  against  the  elect  of 
God,  can  pronounce  sentence  of  condemnation  upon  them,  since 
it  is  God  himself  who  justifies  them  on  the  ground  that  Christ 
by  his  death,  his  resurrection  and  intercession,  secures  their 
justification.  To  be  justified,  therefore,  is  to  stand  without 
accusation  before  God  and  thus  be  recognized  and  treated  as 
righteous  or  just.  In  whatever  conceivable  way  that  state 
may  be  reached  in  which  the  voice  of  legal  condemna- 
tion, which  is  the  direct  opposite  of  justification,  cannot  be 
heard,  the  result  is  justification  in  its  fundamental  import.  He 
who,  as  an  angel,  could  stand  before  God  without  accusation  on 
the  ground  of  sinless  conformity  to  his  law,  would  be  justified 
or  recognized  as  righteous  on  a  ground  vastly  different  from  that 
on  which  one  stands  without  charge  as  accepted  in  Christ  and 
"  through  the  redemption  "  provided  in  him.  Accordingly  there 
are  two  ways  conceivable  in  which  this  righteousness  may  be 
sought.  Only  one  of  these  is  open  to  sinful  or  imperfect  beings, 
while  the  other  alone  is  applicable  to  the  sinless  or  morally  per- 
fect. It  has  been  many  centuries  since  Job  significantly  asked, 
"How  should  man  be  just  with  God  ?"  and  all  these  intervening 

(149) 


150  JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 

ages  have  not  disclosed  the  possiblity  of  his  standing  without 
accusation  in  the  presence  of  his  Maker  on  the  ground  of  per- 
sonal worth,  inherent  goodness,  legalistic  morality.  On  the 
contrary,  "  we  know  what  the  law  saith  it  saith  to  those  that 
are  under  the  law,  that  every  mouth  may  be  stopped  and  all 
the  world  be  convicted  of  guilt  before  God.  Therefore  by  the 
works  of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified  in  his  sight,  for  by 
the  law  is  the  knowledge  of  sin."  Rom.  3:  19,  20.  If  the  dis- 
covery of  sin  thus  precludes  the  possibility  of  legal  justification, 
the  only  ground  of  this  method  of  appearing  before  God  without 
accusation  is  absolute  moral  perfection,  sinless  conformity  to  all 
the  requirements  of  God's  moral  law.  Instead  of  extending  the 
blessing  of  justification  to  the  morally  imperfect,  the  law  thun- 
ders its  curse  in  the  dreadful  sentence  :  "  Cursed  is  every  one 
that  continueth  not  in  all  the  things  that  are  written  in  the  law  to 
do  them."  Embodying  thus  its  essence  and  its  spirit  in  this  dis- 
couraging formula,  it  offers  no  hope  to  the  penitent  ungodly, 
presents  no  prospect  of  peace  with  God  to  the  awakened  sinner. 
Hence  says  Paul  of  himself,  "  I  was  alive  without  the  law  once, 
but  when  the  commandment  came  sin  lived  and  I  died.  For  sin 
taking  occasion  by  the  commandment  deceived  me,  and  by  it 
slew  me."  What  a  fatal  mistake,  then,  for  any  human  being 
to  seek  justification  by  the  works  of  the  law  !  For  the  law 
knows  no  works  as  a  fulfillment  of  its  high  demands,  save  the 
elements  of  a  life  morally  perfect.  This  was  precisely  the  mis- 
take of  Paul's  legalistic  opponents  as  brought  to  view  in 
Romans  and  Galatians,  who,  "being  ignorant  of  God's  righteous- 
ness, and  going  about  to  establish  their  own  righteousness,  had 
not  submitted  themselves  to  the  righteousness  of  God." 

BEABINGS  OF  LEGAL  JUSTIFICATION. 

The  whole  remedial  system,  the  economy  of  the  New  Cove- 
nant, is  at  once  set  aside  as  an  impertinence  if  man  could 
appear  before  God  without  accusation  on  the  ground  of  his  per- 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


151 


sonal  goodness,  the  moral  excellence  of  developed  manhood.  "If 
there  had  been  a  law  given  which  could  have  given  life,  verily 
righteousness  should  have  been  by  the  law."  Gal.  3:  21.  And 
what  tlien  would  logically  follow  ?  "  If  righteousness  come  by 
the  law,  then  Christ  has  died  in  vain."  Gal.  2  :  21.  Hence  the 
doctrine  of  the  Jewish  legalist,  which  is  essentially  that  also  of 
the  modern  Unitarian,  Socinian  and  moralist,  renders  needless 
the  death  of  Christ  and  "frustrates  the  grace  of  God."  Is  it  any 
wonder  that  Paul  should  combat  it  with  all  the  energy  of  his 
ardent  nature  ?  Never  did  any  one  believe  more  implicitly  in 
the  absolute  necessity  of  our  Savior's  death  for  the  redemption 
of  mankind,  and  of  our  imperative  need  of  the  rich  provisions  of 
grace  in  him,  than  did  this  noble  apostle.  Hear  his  own  sub- 
lime description  of  his  deep  and  abiding  trust  in  this  sustain- 
ing source  of  his  peace  and  joy  :  "I  am  crucified  with  Christ. 
Nevertheless  I  live.  Yet  not  I,  but  Christ  liveth  in  me  ;  and  the 
life  which  I  now  live  in  the  flesh,  I  live  by  the  faith  of  the  Son 
of  God,  who  loved  me  and  gave  himself  for  me."  We  see  no 
leaning  here  upon  spiritualized  manhood,  to  say  nothing  of 
a  supposititious  merit  of  moral  excellence  or  personal  good- 
ness. "  Christ  liveth  in  me,"  says  this  earnest  apostle,  but 
Christ  as  one  "  who  loved  me  and  gave  himself  for  me."  It  is  a 
crucified  and  risen  Christ  on  which  his  faith  lays  hold,  and  not 
merely  a  beautiful  life  set  before  him  for  pious  imitation.  The 
formation  of  a  Christ-like  character  is  all  important,  but  it  can 
never  constitute  a  meritorious  ground  of  human  hope.  "  We 
preach  Christ  crucified,  unto  the  Jews  a  stumbling  block,  and 
unto  the  Greeks  foolishness  ;  but  unto  the  called,  whether  Jews 
or  Greeks,  Christ  the  power  of  God,  and  the  wisdom  of  God." 
Christ,  therefore,  and  Christ,  not  as  the  embodiment  of  moral 
beauty,  but  as  an  atoning  sufferer  and  a  risen  Redeemer,  was 
with  Paul  the  sole  "power  of  God"  for  the  justification  and  eter- 
nal life  of  erring  men. 

Now  there  is  no  room  for  this  "power  of  God"  for  man's 
salvation  in  the  legal  method  of  justification.    It  involves  a 


152 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


complete  repudiation  of  the  Messiah  and  his  redemptive  work. 
For  "  if  righteousness  can  come  by  the  law,  then  Christ  has 
died  in  vain."  If  man  can  be  justified  on  the  ground  of  legal- 
istic morality  and  excellence  of  personal  goodness,  then  all 
Messianic  services  and  claims  may  with  safety  be  ignored.  It 
is  thus  perfectly  clear  that  the  erroneous  theory  of  justification 
which  Paul  so  vigorously  and  so  successfully  assailed  was  by 
no  means  superficial,  but  vitally  touched  the  very  foundations 
of  the  Christian  religion  and  would  overturn  the  whole  remedial 
economy.  It  was  not  a  mistake  as  to  the  mere  conditionality 
of  justification,  but  a  radical  error  touching  the  very  ground 
itself  on  which  is  made  possible  the  justification  of  men. 
Instead  of  finding  this  ground  in  Christ  it  would  lead  us  to  seek 
for  it  in  man  himself.  Under  its  baleful  guidance  men  under- 
take "  to  establish  their  own  righteousness  "  and  thus  utterly 
fail  to  "submit  themselves  unto  the  righteousness  of  God." 

THE  METHOD  OF  FAITH. 

Over  against  the  tremendously  false  system  just  described 
the  apostle  Paul  sets  forth  in  bold  and  striking  contrast  the 
true  method  of  justification,  the  only  possible  way  in  which 
man  can  stand  without  accusation  before  God  and  thus  be 
accepted  and  recognized  as  righteous.  Hear  him :  "  By  the 
deeds  of  the  law  shall  no  flesh  be  justified  in  his  sight ;  for  by 
the  law  is  the  knowledge  of  sin.  But  now  the  righteousness  of 
God  is  manifested,  being  witnessed  by  the  law  and  the  proph- 
ets ;  even  the  righteousness  of  God  by  faith  unto  all  those  who 
believe.  For  there  is  no  difference ;  for  all  have  sinned  and 
come  short  of  the  glory  of  God;  being  justified  as  a  gift*  by  his 
grace  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus,  whom  God 
has  set  forth  to  be  a  propitiation  through  faith  in  his  blood  to 
declare  his  righteousness  because  of  the  passing  over  of  the  sins 
done  aforetime,  in  the  forbearance  of  God :  to  declare  at  this 

*The  best  rendering  of  dorean. 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


153 


time  his  righteousness  that  he  might  be  just  and  the  justifier  of 
him  who  believes  in  Jesus."  With  great  propriety,  indeed,  did 
Olshausen  pronounce  this  wonderful  passage  "the  citadel  of  the 
Christian  faith."  It  sets  forth  the  real  ground,  the  only  foun- 
dation of  the  spiritual  hopes  of  humanity.  It  contains  the  apos- 
tle's positive  and  formal  exposition  of  that  "  righteousness  of 
God  "  which  he  had  previously  emphasized  as  the  reason  why 
the  gospel  is  "the  power  of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  who 
believes."  How  much  is  embraced  in  the  believing  here  referred 
to  remains  as  yet  to  be  seen.  We  notice  at  present  two  import- 
ant features  in  this  "righteousness  of  God,"  which  is  asserted  to 
be  "unto  all  who  believe,"  namely,  the  universality  as  to  its 
offer  of  grace,  and  the  conditionality  as  to  its  actual  bestow- 
ment.  The  reason  given  why  the  offer  is  "  unto  all "  is  that 
"  there  is  no  difference,  for  all  have  sinned  and  come  short  of 
the  glory  of  God."  In  other  words  all  stand  in  need  of  divine 
mercy  as  all  are  involved  in  the  guilt  of  individual  transgres- 
sion. Hence  the  only  way  to  justification  is  the  one  imme- 
diately pointed  out  by  the  apostle:  "Being  justified  as  a  gift 
by  his  grace  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus." 
Thus  justification  comes  "as  a  gift,"  and  not  as  a  debt  due  to 
moral  and  legalistic  claims  ;  it  comes  "by  grace,"  and  not  by 
meritorious  works  of  the  law ;  it  comes  "through  the  redemption 
that  is  in  Christ  Jesus,"  and  not  through  the  moral  excellence 
of  man  himself. 

BEABINGS  OF  THIS  METHOD. 

"Where  is  boasting  then  ?  It  is  excluded.  On  what  princi- 
ple ?  of  works  ?  Nay,  but  on  the  principle  of  faith."  If  men 
must  rely,  not  on  their  personal  goodness,  but  on  the  grace  of 
God  in  Christ,  must  trustingly  look  to  the  redemptive  work  of 
the  Son  of  God  as  the  sole  ground  of  justification,  all  occasion 
for  boasting  is  at  once  swept  away  in  the  expulsion  of  all  spirit- 
ual pride  and  all  sense  of  self-righteousness.  This  trusting  reli- 


154 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


ance  on  "  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus  "  is  the  faith  of 
which  the  apostle  speaks  as  in  contrast  with  the  delusive 
dependence  of  legalistic  moralists  on  their  own  supposed  per- 
sonal fitness  for  divine  approbation.  The  faith  method  of  justi- 
fication, therefore,  shows  the  ground  of  this  blessing  to  be  alto- 
gether objective,  as  "in  Christ,"  and  in  no  measure  subjective, 
as  in  man  himself.  Faith  itself,  being  an  act  or  state  of  the 
human  soul,  cannot  be  regarded  as  entering  into  the  ground 
of  a  righteous  acceptance  with  God,  but  as  belonging  only  to 
the  conditionality  of  this  blessing.  That  external  acts  of  faith 
truly  manifesting  reliance  on  the  grace  of  God  in  Christ,  trust- 
ful acts  in  which  men  "submit  themselves  unto  the  righteousness 
of  God,"  may  likewise  enter  into  the  conditionality  of  gospel 
blessings  and  form  elements  of  the  faith  method  of  justification, 
will  be  clearly  shown  hereafter.  On  this  point  we  merely  advert 
at  present  to  the  erroneous  supposition  of  many  that  man's 
inner  religious  states  possess  a  value  in  the  sight  of  God  quite 
superior  to  outward  spiritual  activity.  The  latter,  indeed,  is  of 
necessity  but  a  reflex  of  all  that  is  found  in  the  former.  What 
we  would  now  emphasize,  however,  is  the  thought  that  in  neither 
of  these  departments  of  religious  experience  is  the  ground  of  jus- 
tification to  be  sought,  for  our  inner  spiritual  states  are  just  as 
much  ours,  just  as  human  in  their  nature,  as  our  outward  acts 
of  real  obedience. 

No,  it  is  not  toward  man  at  all,  whether  his  inner  or  his 
outer  religious  life  be  considered,  but  to  Jesus  the  Christ,  that 
the  eye  must  be  directed  when  seeking  the  ground  of  our  hope. 
Hence  the  important  conclusion  to  which  Paul  was  led  (Rom.  8: 
1-2)  by  his  own  irresistible  logic  :  "  There  is,  therefore,  now  no 
condemnation  to  those  who  are  in  Christ  Jesus.  For  the  law  of 
the  Spirit  of  life  in  Christ  Jesus  has  made  me  free  from  the  law 
of  sin  and  death."  It  is  clear  from  the  connection  of  the  two 
verses  that  the  freedom  or  deliverance  here  referred  to,  is  not 
the  internal  or  subjective  deliverance  from  the  dominion  of  sin, 
the  importance  of  which  in  its  own  place  cannot  well  be  over-esti- 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


155 


mated,  but  the  objective,  judicial  deliverance  from  "  the  curse 
of  the  law,"  deliverance  from  the  legal  "condemnation"  to 
which  all  who  are  not  "in  Christ"  stand  constantly  exposed." 
And  the  spiritual  law  of  life,  Hebraistically  called  "  the  law  of 
the  Spirit  of  life,"  by  which  this  deliverance  is  secured,  and 
which  is  here  located  "in  Christ"  had  previously  been  described 
by  the  apostle  (3:  24)  as  "  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ 
Jesus  " — the  redemptive  source  of  life  which  is  found  alone  in 
him.  ■  Now  as  the  redemption  which  is  in  Christ  is  twice  iden- 
tified with  the  remission  of  sins  (Eph.  1:  7  and  Col.  1: 14)  and  as 
we  are  "justified  by  grace  through  the  redemption  which  is  in 
Christ,"  it  is  clear  that  justification  of  believers  is  through  the 
forgiveness  of  sins.  Hence  Paul  quotes  David  (Rom.  4:  7,  8)  as 
describing  the  blessing  of  justificarion  in  the  following  lan- 
guage :  "Blessed  are  they  whose  iniquities  are  forgiven  and 
whose  sins  are  covered ;  blessed  is  the  man  to  whom  the  Lord 
will  not  impute  sin."  To  enter  into  Christ,  therefore,  is  to 
become  justified,  and  this  through  the  remission  of  sins.  How 
vastly  different  is  this  Pauline  conception  from  the  Augustiniau 
conceit  which  has  so  largely  influenced  the  Christian  world, 
that  justification  by  faith  is  an  infusion  of  righteousness  into 
the  human  soul  by  the  power  of  "  irresistible  grace  !  " 


THE  TWO  METHODS  IN  CONTRAST. 


From  the  development  of  our  subject  thus  far  in  the  light  of 
Paul's  great  argument,  the  utter  impossibility  of  combining  the 
method  of  justification  which  he  combats  with  that  which  he 
upholds  is  perfectly  obvious.  The  two  stand  over  against  each 
other  in  mutual  exclusiveness,  as  thoroughly  inharmonious  and 
absolutely  irreconcilable.  As  one  cannot  be  sinless  and  sinful 
at  the  same  time,  morally  perfect  and  yet  ungodly ;  so  one  can- 
not be  justified  on  legal  grounds  and  yet  through  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ.  Compliance  with  the  laws  of  grace,  with  the  precepts  of 
the  gospel,  may  stand  connected  with  the  gracious  system  of 


156 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


justification  through  Christ,  but  a  justification  on  the  basis  of 
law,  bringing  a  merited  reward  as  due  to  moral  or  legal  claims, 
excludes,  of  necessity,  all  dependence  on  Christ  and  the  need  of 
redemption  through  him.  Nor  can  any  blessing  come  to  us  as 
the  gift  of  God,  and  yet  be  the  payment  of  a  debt  due  to  meri- 
torious service  or  deserving  works.  A  mere  glance  at  the  fol- 
lowing tabular  view  of  striking  antitheses,  brought  out  in  Paul's 
discussion  of  this  subject,  will  show  us  the  perfect  contrast 
between  the  two  systems,  while  a  thoughtful  and  patient  study 
of  all  the  antithetical  points  presented  will  bring  to  light  and 
expose  the  many  mistakes  made  by  disputants  in  their  applica- 
tions of  the  apostle's  expressions  and  sentiments.  As  the  argu- 
ment is  found  mainly  in  the  epistle  to  the  Romans,  reference  to 
that  book  will  be  indicated  only  by  chapter  and  verse,  while 
reference  to  other  epistles  will  be  fully  made  : 


JUSTIFICATION. 


By  Works  of  Law 
is 

1.  Meritorious  (4:4) 

as  of 

2.  The  sinless  (Gal.  3:10) 

Hence  is 

1.  Withoat  pardon  (3:20), 

2.  Without  grace  (4:4), 

3.  Without  Christ  (Gal.  3 :21) , 

4.  Without  faith  (4:14), 

5.  Without  the  obedience  of  faith 

(4:14), 
Resulting  in 

1.  Occasion  for  boasting  (4:2), 

2.  Reward  as  a  debt  (4:4), 


By  Faith  in  Christ, 
is 

1.  Gratuitous  (3:24) 

as  of 

2.  The  sinful  (4:5). 

Hence  is 

1.  Through  pardon  (4 :6-8) . 

2.  By  grace  (3:24). 

3.  Through  Christ  (3 :24) . 

4.  By  faith  (3:28). 

5.  Through  the  obedience 

of  faith  (4:12). 
Resulting  in 

1.  Exclusion   of  boasting 

(3:27). 

2.  Rewai'd  as  a  gift  (Eph. 

2:8). 


With  the  eye  resting  upon  this  collection  of  antitheses,  by 
which  the  true  nature  and  comprehensiveness  of  the  gospel  sys- 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


157 


tern  of  justification  can  be  clearly  seen  in  the  thorough  contrast 
with  the  opposite  scheme,  we  may  easily  detect  and  render 
apparent  the  erroneous  conceptions  to  which  allusion  has  been 
made.  It  will  be  seen  at  once  that  it  is  not  by  the  acquisition 
of  power  through  the  gospel  to  reach  perfection  of  personal  holi- 
ness, and  thus  satisfy  the  demands  of  the  divine  law  as  "  holy, 
just  and  good  "  that  we  are  justified  by  faith.  He  who  imag- 
ines that  through  the  aids  of  grace  he  has  reached  this  state, 
may  find  himself  rebuked  by  the  apostle  John  in  the  following 
passage  :  "If  we  say  that  we  have  no  sin  we  deceive  ourselves, 
and  the  truth  is  not  in  us.  If  we  confess  our  sins  he  is  faithful 
and  just  to  forgive  us  our  sins,  and  to  cleanse  us  from  all 
unrighteousness."  We  may  not  hope  to  attain  personal  perfec- 
tion under  the  gospel  any  more  than  under  the  law.  And  if 
this  could  be  done,  and  should  be  the  basis  on  which  men  are 
justified,  it  would  appear  at  last  that  the  ground  of  justification 
is  not  "in  Christ'"  but  in  the  believer  himself.  How  very  far, 
therefore,  from  the  true  conception  of  justification  by  faith  are 
the  following  statements  of  Olshausen,  who  represents  herein 
quite  a  large  class  of  theologians  : 

"  That  which  is  new  in  the  gospel  does  not  consist  in  a  more 
excellent  system  of  morality,  but  in  this,  that  the  gospel  opens 
a  new  source  of  strength  by  means  of  which  true  morality  is 
attainable."  No,  that  which  is  new  in  the  gospel  is  neither  "  a 
more  excellent  system  of  morality,"  nor  yet  the  opening  of  a 
"  new  source  of  strength  "  for  attaining  "  true  morality,"  but 
"  the  redemption  which  is  in  Christ  Jesus  "  for  the  cancellation 
of  transgressions  and  sins.  Once  more  from  Olshausen  :  "  The 
realization  of  absolute  perfection  is  the  highest  end  of  man's 
existence ;  the  law  could  not  eflect  this  any  further  than  the 
bringing  forth  of  an  outward  legality,  but  by  regeneration  an 
inward  condition  is  through  grace,  produced  in  believers,  'the 
righteousness  of  God,'  which  answers  the  highest  requirements." 
"  That  work  which  was  objectively  accomplished  on  the  cross, 
is  thus  subjectively  applied  to  the  individual  believer,  that  germ 


158 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


of  the  new  man  which  exists  in  Christ  is  grafted  into  and  born 
in  the  old  man.  This  act  of  transfer  is,  therefore,  a  mysterious 
occurrence  in  the  depths  of  the  soul,  a  new  creation,  which  none 
can  effect  by  his  own  powers,  a  pure  gift  of  the  Spirit  who 
breatheth  where  he  listeth." 

How  utterly  foreign  all  this  is  to  the  conception  of  Paul  is 
perfectly  obvious  from  the  tabular  view  presented  above.  He 
never  dreamed  of  resolving  justification  by  faith  into  "  a  myste- 
rious occurrence  in  the  depths  of  the  soul,"  grounded  on  "  an 
inward  condition  produced  in  believers  through  grace  "  and  con- 
sisting of  an  incomprehensible  "transfer"  of  a  moral  or  spirit- 
ual "germ"  from  Christ  to  the  believer  for  an  impossible  "real- 
ization of  absolute  perfection!"  How  different  the  language 
and  the  ideas  of  the  apostle,  "Being  justified  as  a  gift  by  his 
grace  through  the  redemption  that  is  in  Christ  Jesus."  Yes,  in 
Christ  himself  "in  whom  we  have  redemption  through  his  blood, 
even  the  forgiveness  of  sins." 

With  equal  clearness  our  tabulated  antithetical  points,  as 
gathered  from  the  apostle's  grand  argument  on  justification 
evince  the  folly  of  representing  any  act  of  obedience  springing 
from  faith  in  Christ  as  belonging  to  the  legalistic  system. 
Nothing  but  sheer  thoughtlessness  or  inexcusable  ignorance 
touching  the  simple  elements  of  the  subject  so  clearly  developed 
by  the  apostle,  could  lead  to  such  an  error.  Grace  has  its  laws 
to  be  obeyed,  the  gospel  requires  submission  to  its  command- 
ments, yet  these  are  not  only  compatible  with  faith  in  Christ 
Jesus,  but  manifest,  indeed,  the  believer's  confiding  trust  in 
him ;  whereas,  "if  they  who  are  of  the  law  be  heirs,  faith  is 
made  void  and  the  promise  of  no  effect."  The  law-system  and 
the  faith-system  cannot  be  made  to  mingle  their  elements.  In 
the  thoroughness  of  the  absolute  and  inextinguishable  contrast 
between  them,  their  irreconcilable  antagonism  appears.  It  is 
not  possible  for  God  himself  to  justify  any  one  without  pardon, 
without  grace,  without  Christ,  without  faith  in  Christ,  without 
"the  obedience  of  faith,"  and  at  the  same  time  justify  him 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


159 


through  pardon,  by  grace,  through  Christ,  by  faith,  through 
"the  obedience  of  faith."  And  here  let  it  be  carefully  noted, 
that  in  the  great  epistle  whose  object  is  to  prove  that  man  is 
"justified  by  faith  apart  from  the  works  of  the  law"  the  apostle 
twice  emphasizes  the  importance  of  the  "obedience  of  faith"  as 
the  object  of  the  gospel,  for  which  there  can  be  no  room  what- 
ever in  any  system  that  makes  faith  itself  void.  Hear  him  in 
the  following  beautiful  passage  with  which  he  concludes  the 
epistle  :  "Now  to  him  that  is  of  power  to  establish  you  accord- 
ing to  my  gospel,  and  the  preaching  of  Jesus  Christ  according 
to  the  revelation  of  the  mystery  which  was  kept  secret  since  the 
world  began,  but  now  is  made  manifest  and  by  the  Scriptures 
of  the  prophets  according  to  the  commandment  of  the  everlast- 
ing God,  made  known  to  all  nations  for  the  obedience  of  faith  ; 
to  God  only  wise,  be  glory  through  Jesus  Christ  forever." 

Now  that  this  "obedience  of  faith,"  this  obedient  surrender 
to  the  requirements  of  the  gospel  as  springing  from  faith  in 
Jesus  Christ,  was  contemplated  by  the  apostle  as  entering  into 
the  faith-method  of  justification,  is  evident  from  his  statement 
in  Rom.  4:  9-12:  "We  say  that  faith  was  reckoned  to  Abraham 
for  righteousness.  How  was  it  reckoned  ?  When  he  was  in  cir- 
cumcision, or  in  uncircumcision  ?  Not  in  circumcision,  but  in 
uncircumcision.  And  he  received  the  sign  of  circumcision,  a 
seal  of  the  righteousness  of  the  faith  which  he  had  while  in 
uncircumcision,  that  he  might  be  the  father  of  those  who 
believe,  though  they  be  not  circumcised;  that  righteousness 
might  be  reckoned  to  them  also  :  and  the  father  of  the  circum- 
cised in  the  case  of  those  who  are  not  only  of  the  circumcision, 
but  also  walk  in  the  steps  of  the  faith  of  our  father  Abraham, 
while  in  uncircumcision."  Paul  therefore  teaches  that  the 
blessing  of  justification  comes  upon  those  who  walk  by  faith  in 
a  loving,  trustful  submission  to  the  divine  will,  after  the  exam- 
ple of  Abraham.  For  what  saith  the  Scripture?  "Abraham, 
Abraham,  lay  not  thine  hand  upon  the  lad,  neither  do  thou 
anything  to  him ;  for  now  I  know  that  thou  fearest  God,  seeing 


160 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


thou  hast  not  withheld  thy  son,  thine  only  son  from  me.  .  . 
By  myself  have  I  sworn,  saith  the  Lord,  because  thou  hast  done 
this  thing,  and  hast  not  withheld  thy  son,  thy  only  son,  that  in 
blessing  I  will  bless  thee  and  in  multiplying  I  will  multiply  thee 
as  the  stars  of  the  heaven,  and  as  the  sand  which  is  upon  the 
seashore ;  and  in  thy  seed  shall  all  the  nations  of  the  earth  be 
blessed,  because  thou  hast  obeyed  ray  voice."  So,  also :  By 
faith  Xoah,  being  warned  of  God  of  things  not  seen  as  yet,  pre- 
pared an  ark  to  the  saving  of  his  house,  by  which  he  condemned 
the  world  and  became  heir  of  the  righteousness  which  is  by 
faith."  And  so  likewise,  "By  faith  Abel  offered  to  God  a  more 
excellent  sacrifice  than  Cain,  by  which  he  obtained  witness  that 
he  was  righteous,  God  testifying  upon  (epi)  his  gifts." 

And  thus  we  see  that  a  blessing  which  is  conditioned  on  the 
obedience  which  springs  from  faith  is  Scripturally  represented 
as  conditioned  on  faith  itself,  and  this  from  the  necessity  of  the 
case,  for  whatever  is  suspended  on  an  outward  manifestation  of 
faith,  is  thereby  suspended  on  the  faith  thus  manifested.  And 
why  should  not  faith  in  the  form  of  visible  action  into  which  it 
carries  its  spiritual  qualities,  whatever  they  may  be,  faith  as 
bodying  forth  the  believer's  implicit  trust  in  the  saving  mercy 
of  God,  and,  by  consequence,  a  complete  renunciation  of  all  self- 
righteousness,  be,  at  least,  of  equal  value  with  itself,  as  a  prin- 
ciple hi  lden  in  the  depths  of  the  soul  ?  Why  should  the  inner 
sense  of  dependence  on  God  be  in  his  sight  of  more  value  than 
the  impressive  embodiment  of  this  reliance  on  him,  in  a  practi- 
cal submission  to  his  will?  Behold  that  flower  in  the  bud! 
Wliat  is  it  ?  A  rose.  See  it  now  again,  it  is  full-blown.  What 
is  it  now  ?  A  rose  still ;  nay,  rather,  a  rose  in  its  perfection. 
Even  so,  faith,  when  budding  in  the  heart,  is  surely  faith ;  and 
when  blossoming  in  the  life,  and  bringing  forth  the  fruit  of  obe- 
dience to  Jesus,  is  it  not  faith  still  ?  Yes,  as  James  would 
assure  us,  it  is  "  faith  made  perfect "  in  its  fruitful  manifesta- 
tions. 

In  the  further  development  of  this  interesting  and  important 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


161 


part  of  the  subject,  the  writer  may  perhaps  be  excused  for  tran- 
scribing what  he  has  elsewhere  said,  with  as  great  clearness  as 
he  could  now  possibly  exhibit.    I  quote  as  follows : 

Tbe  spiritual  value  of  faith  itself,  be  this  what  it  may, 
attaches  of  necessity,  to  all  actions  springing  from  faith.  The 
stream  is,  in  quality,  as  the  fountain  whence  it  issues ;  the 
branches,  leaves  and  fruit,  as  the  tree  on  which  they  grow. 
Paul  was  never  so  unwise  as  to  suppose  any  incompatibility 
between  fa'th  and  what  he  calls  "the  obedience  of  faith."  For 
in  every  act  produced  by  faith  in  Christ,  the  believer  is  really 
looking  to  him  and  reposing  upon  him  as  the  ground  of  all 
hope  and  the  source  of  all  life.  It  is  in  this  and  this  only,  that 
either  faith  or  'the  obedience  of  faith"  has  any  real  worth  as 
constantly  fixing  the  eye  of  the  soul  upon  Jesus.  But  he  who 
relies  on  legalistic  morality  for  justification  looks  not  toward 
Calvary,  but  in  another  direction,  and  thus  practically  repudi- 
ates Christ  himself,  and,  of  course,  all  personal  need  of  faith 
and  grace.  Hence,  the  apostle  says :  "If  they  who  are  of 
the  law  be  heirs,  faith  is  made  void  and  the  promise  of  no 
eflfect."  Not  so,  however,  does  he  reason  respecting  obedience 
to  Christ  as  springing  from  faith  in  him.  He  "svho  "in  obeying 
the  truth"  is  leaning  on  Jesus  for  blessing,  does  not  declare  faith 
needless,  nor  turn  away  from  its  great  object,  but  rather  from 
every  system  of  self-righteousness  and  delusive  reliance  on 
human  goodness. 

So  thought  Paul,  or  he  would  not  have  represented  in  this 
argument  righteousness  as  imputed  to  those  "who  walk  in  the 
Steps  of  that  faith  which  Abraham  had  while  in  uncircum- 
cision."  While,  therefore,  neither  faith  nor  deeds  of  faith  can 
constitute  the  ground  of  justification,  any  more  than  legal 
works,  yet  the  blessing  of  God  may  be  conditioned  as  much  on 
obedient  acts  produced  by  faith  as  on  the  act  of  believing  itself 
without  any  detriment  whatever  to  the  remedial  system.  The 
public  confession  of  Christ's  name  (Matt.  10:  32)  and  "the  bap- 
tism of  repentance  for  remission  of  sins"  (Mark  1:  4;  Acts  2:  38 
11 


1G2 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITB. 


and  22:  16)  are  not  legalistic  pretensions  to  merit  but  simple  ele- 
ments of  the  economy  of  grace  divinely  approved.  Surely,  the 
need  of  forgiveness  is  the  need  of  grace,  and  he  who  seeks  it  by 
being  "baptized  into  Christ"  (Rom.  6:  3;  Gal.  3:  27)  is  not  looking 
to  himself,  but  to  Jesus,  not  "going  about  to  establish  his  own 
righteousness,"  but  looking  for  salvation  on  the  feasible  condi- 
tion of  trust  in  his  Redeemer. 

PAUL  AND  JAMES. 

In  the  light  of  the  thorough-going  contrast  between  legal 
justification  and  justification  by  faith,  as  exhibited  in  our  tabu- 
lar view  of  the  antitheses  involved  in  Paul's  discussion  of  this 
subject,  we  may  not  only  see  the  perfect  harmony  of  this  apos- 
tle's teaching  with  that  of  James,  but  are  prepared  to  rightly 
estimate  the  following  statement  of  Baur  who,  with  the  dog- 
matic confidence  characteristic  of  German  critics,  asserts  an 
irreconcilable  discrepancy  between  the  two  apostles  : 

"The  main  doctrinal  position  of  the  epistle  of  James,  'By 
works  a  man  is  justified  and  not  by  faith  only,'  2:  14,  is  the 
direct  opposite  of  the  Pauline  doctrine  as  it  is  stated  in  Rom. 
8:  28,  in  the  proposition,  'a  man  is  justified  by  faith  apart 
from  works  of  law.'  It  cannot  be  denied  that  between  these  two 
doctrines  there  exists  an  essential  difference,  a  direct  contradic- 
tion. It  may  be  urged  that  James  says  no  more  than  'not  by 
faith  only,'  that  he  refers  justification  not  exclusively  to  works, 
but  partly,  at  least,  to  faith  also.  But  the  Pauline  proposition, 
on  the  other  hand,  distinctly  excludes  works  and  refers  justifi- 
cation to  that  very  faith  of  which  James  says  that  without 
works  it  is  nothing,  forms  no  element  of  the  religious  life  at  all. 
Those  works,  then,  which  Paul  altogether  repudiates,  are  with 
James  the  ground  of  justification ;  and  that  faith  which  with 
James  has  no  religious  value  whatever  apart  from  works,  is 
with  Paul  the  principle  of  justification." 

Now,  nothing  but  an  inexcusable  disregard  of  what  each 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


163 


apostle  has  said  as  descriptive  of  the  "works"  of  which  he  speaks, 
can  account  for  the  grossly  false  assertion  that  "those  works 
which  Paul  altogether  repudiates  are  with  James  the  ground  of 
justification !"  And  we  do  not  wonder  that  a  critic  who  is  capa- 
ble of  such  misrepresentation  should  dogmatically  declare  on 
the  basis  of  his  own  perversion  of  apostolic  teaching,  that  "it 
cannot  be  denied  that  between  these  two  doctrines  there  exists 
an  essential  difference,  a  direct  contradiction!"  What  he  here 
positively  says  "cannot  be  denied,"  cannot  only  be  denied  but 
demonstrabl}'"  shown  to  be  false.  What  does  Paul  say  of  the 
works  which  he  repudiates,  while  showing  that  by  legal  works 
shall  no  one  be  justified  ?  Listen:  "If  they  who  are  of  the  law 
be  heirs,  faith  is  made  void  and  the  promise  of  no  effect." 
What  does  James  say  of  the  works  which  he  inculcates  while 
contending  that  "a  man  is  justified  by  works  and  not  by  faith 
only?"  Listen:  "Was  not  Abraham,  our  father,  justified  by 
works,  in  that  he  offered  up  Isaac,  his  son,  upon  the  altar? 
Thou  seest  that  faith  wrought  with  his  works,  and  by  works  was 
faith  made  perfect.''^  Whenever,  therefore,  it  can  be  shown 
that  the  works  by  which  "faith  is  made  void,"  are  identical  with 
those  by  which  "faith  is  made  perfect,"  then,  and  not  till  then, 
can  an  apology  be  found  for  Baur's  reckless  statement  that 
"those  works  which  Paul  altogether  repudiates,  are  with  James 
the  ground  of  justification."  The  apostle  James  never  dreamed 
of  legal  works  as  constituting  "the  ground  of  justification" 
which  would  "frustrate  the  grace  of  Grod"  and  render  abortive 
the  death  of  his  Son.  Gal.  2:  21.  And  the  apostle  Paul  never 
claimed  justification  for  one  who  believes  apart  from  "the  work 
of  faith,"  but  for  such  as  would  "walk  in  the  steps  of  the  faitli 
of  Abraham."  Eom.  4:  12.  When  James  said:  "He  that  look- 
eth  into  the  perfect  law,  the  law  of  liberty,  and  so  continueth, 
being  not  a  hearer  that  forgetteth  but  a  doer  that  worketh,  this 
man  shall  be  blessed  in  his  doing,"  he  had  in  view  a  system  in 
which  there  is  no  room  whatever  for  legal  works  as  "the  ground 
of  justification,"  with  its  impossible  requisite  of  sinless  perfec- 


1G4 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


tion  in  the  personal  excellence  of  the  justified.  And  when  Paul 
repudiated  the  legal  basis  of  justification,  he  had  in  mind  a  sys- 
tem in  which  there  is  no  room  whatever  for  faith  in  Christ  or 
obedience  to  him,  or  for  Christ  himself,  as  any  ground  of  our 
hope  !  It  is  thus  as  clear  as  sunlight  that  "those  works  which 
Paul  altogether  r^^pudiates,"  and  the  works  which  James 
demands  belong  respectively  to  two  incompatible  systems 
whose  elements  cannot  by  any  means  be  associated. 

But  Baur,  whose  attention  was  directed  by  certain  observa- 
tions of  Neander  to  the  kind  of  works  referred  to  by  James  as 
actions  connected  with  faith,  endeavors  to  justify  his  criticism 
as  follows  :  "If  we  are  to  regard  these  remarks  as  actually 
shedding  light  on  the  subject,  the  chief  point  in  them  must  be 
this,  that  the  works  of  James  are  different  from  those  of  Paul, 
that  he  means  such  works  as  proceed  from  faith,  and  are  the 
fruits  of  faith."  Exactly  so.  James  does  mean  just  "such 
works  as  proceed  from  faith  and  are  the  fruits  of  faith."  "But 
Paul  does  not  distinguish  two  kinds  of  works,"  continues  Baur, 
"he  says  broadly  that  it  is  impossible  to  be  justified  by  them. 
This  must  apply  to  those  that  proceed  from  faith  as  well  as  oth- 
ers ;  for  if  they  proceed  from  faith  then  faith  is  there  already, 
and  with  faith  justification  ;  so  that  they  cannot  have  been  the 
means  of  justification.  Kern  was  thus  perfectly  justified  in 
asserting  that  the  difference  between  Paul  and  James  is  one  of 
principle  and  cannot  be  got  rid  of." 

This  only  shows  how  far  this  critic  falls  short  of  grasping 
the  true  import  of  Paul's  argument  on  justification.  The  apos- 
tle does  distinguish  two  kinds  of  works  which  differ  from  each 
other  so  radically  that  they  cannot  belong  to  the  same  system — 
differ,  indeed,  so  essentially  as  to  mutually  exclude  each  other. 
He  so  describes  the  works  which  he  repudiates  as  to  distinguish 
them  from  the  whole  economy  of  faith,  from  the  entire  system  of 
grace,  and,  by  consequence,  from  all  working  required  by  this 
system.  If  it  be  true,  as  the  apostle  teaches,  that  "faith  is  made 
void"  through  justification  by  the  works  which  he  repudiates. 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


1G5 


then,  of  necessity,  is  the  "work  of  faith"  for  which  he  commends 
the  Thessalonians  equally  made  void  by  that  method,  and  for 
that  very  reason,  among  others,  he  uncompromisingly  opposes 
the  legalistic  system.  Thus  the  "work  of  faith"  is  not  only  dis- 
tinguished by  him  from  works  of  law,  but  shown  to  be  so  radi- 
cally different  that  they  cannot  co-exist,  cannot  possibly  enter 
into  the  same  method  of  justification.  As  by  the  legal  system 
faith  in  Christ  is  absolutely  set  aside,  it  follows  that  all  relig- 
ious action  springing  from  faith  in  him,  is  thereby  also 
excluded.  There  may  be,  and  there  must  be  an  observance  of 
God's  moral  law  as  to  the  main  tenor  of  life  in  order  even  to  jus- 
tification by  faith  through  grace,  for  grace  will  not  bestow 
justification  upon  those  who  persist  in  immorality.  Yet  this 
relative  keeping  of  the  law,  which  is  both  positive  and  impera- 
tive, can  only  be  regarded  as  a  condition  and  by  no  means  as 
the  ground  of  our  justification.  "Were  the  law  itself  to  justify, 
it  could  only  do  so,  not  on  the  condition  of  a  mere  relative 
observance  of  its  requirement,  but  on  the  ground  of  a  faultless 
fulfillment.  Its  maxim  is,  "Cursed  is  every  one  that  continues 
not  in  all  the  things  that  are  written  in  the  book  of  the  law  to 
do  them."  Such  a  keeping  of  the  divine  law,  were  it  possible 
to  man,  would  truly  be  the  ground,  and  not  a  mere  condition  of 
justification,  and  as  such  would,  as  we  have  seen,  "frustrate  the 
grace  of  God,"  and  render  needless  "the  redemption  which  is  in 
Christ  Jesus." 

Clearly,  then,  when  James  asserts  that  "  a  man  is  justified 
by  works  and  not  by  faith  only,"  he  is  not  to  be  construed  as 
insisting  that  any  works,  even  those  that  spring  from  faith,  can 
be  regarded  as  the  meritorious  ground  of  justification,  but 
merely  that  this  blessing  is  graciously  conditioned  on  the  "work 
of  faith"  as  well  as  on  faith  itself,  on  the  former,  indeed,  as  the 
manifestation  of  faith's  perfection.  And  when  Paul  insists  that 
"by  faith  a  man  is  justified  apart  from  works  of  law,"  he 
makes  no  opposition  to  "  the  obedience  of  faith "  which  he 
regards  as  belonging  to  the  gracious  system  of  justification, 


1G6 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


since  lie  holds  that  in  order  to  receive  this  blessing  one  must 
"walk  in  the  steps  of  the  faith  which  Abraham  had."  With 
neither  apostle  does  either  faith  or  the  "work  of  faith"  enter 
into  the  ground  of  justification,  while  with  each  of  them,  both 
faith  and  the  "work  of  faith"  stand  on  an  equal  footing  as  the 
gracious  condition  of  this  blessing.  Neither  of  them  ascribes 
to  faith  a  virtue  or  etRcacy  which  is  denied  to  "the  obedience  of 
faith."  There  is  no  ground  wliatever  in  the  teaching  of  either 
for  the  following  position  of  Baur  :  "When  James  puts  justifi- 
cation by  works  in  the  place  of  the  Pauline  justification  by 
faith,  he  ascribes  to  works  that  absolute  value  which  faith  has 
with  Paul.  The  reason  why  Paul  denied  justification  to  works 
was  that  there  was  nothing  absolute  about  them,  and  that  they 
could  only  stand  in  an  inadequate  relation  to  justification. 
Now,  what  does  James  do  but  vindicate  for  works  that  absolute 
character  which,  according  to  Paul,  they  cannot  possibly  have  ? 
They  could  not  have  this  absolute  character  except  in  virtue  of 
their  unity  with  faith,  and  thus  the  absoluteness  of  works 
would  not  belong  to  works,  but  to  faith." 

Now  to  suppose  that  Paul  conditioned  justification  on  faith 
and  denied  it  to  works  because  of  an  alleged  "absolute  value" 
possessed  by  the  former  and  not  by  the  latter,  and  to  say  that 
James  sought  to  "vindicate  for  works  that  absolute  character 
which,  according  to  Paul,  they  cannot  possibly  have,"  is  to 
show  again  an  utter  failure  to  enter  into  the  meaning  of  either 
apostle.  Has  any  one  ever  been  able  to  show  that  the  act  of 
believing  possesses  an  "absolute  value"  that  does  not  belong  to 
other  human  acts  ?  Can  faith  sustain  "  an  adequate  relation  to 
justification"  any  more  than  those  acts  of  obedience  which  are 
produced  by  faith  and  by  which,  as  James  informs  us,  faith 
itself  is  "made  perfect?  "  It  is  this  very  conceit  of  a  special 
virtue  or  efllcacy  inherent  in  faith  itself  and  supposed  to  be 
foreign  to  the  practical  manifestations  of  faith  that  has 
beclouded  this  whole  subject  in  the  speculations  of  men.  No, 
"  the  reason   why  Paul  denied  justification  to  works"  and 


JUSTIFICATION  BY  FAITH. 


167 


insisted  on  a  coming  to  Christ  through  faith  was  not  because  of 
any  "absolute  value"  either  in  this  faith  in  Christ  or  this  coming 
to  him,  but  because  of  man's  imperfection  and  the  consequent 
impossibility  of  his  justification  on  a  legal  basis  which  demands 
nothing  less  than  absolute  moral  perfection.  He  must  come  to 
Christ  for  the  redemption  that  is  in  him,  and  not  rely  on  any 
supposed  "  absolute  value "  in  any  act  of  his  own,  whether 
inward  or  outward.  Can  any  one  find  perfection  in  our  inner 
religious  states  any  more  than  in  our  external  acts  of  obedience? 
Faith  is  emphasized  by  the  Scriptures,  not  because  of  standing 
in  opposition  to  outward  religious  action,  but  because  it  leads 
through  submission  "to  the  righteousness  of  God"  to  the  only 
fountain  of  salvation  for  men.  And  neither  with  James  nor 
with  any  other  sacred  writer  are  "  those  works  which  Paul  alto- 
gether repudiates,"  nor  any  other  works  whatever,  "the  ground 
of  justification."  Christ  and  Christ  only  is  that  ground,  and 
all  that  we  can  do  in  believing  on  his  name  and  in  submitting 
to  his  will  is  but  the  gracious  condition  of  our  acceptance. 

Let  us  conclude  with  devout  and  profound  thanksgiving  that 
beings  so  sinful  and  weak  as  we  are  can  find  a  way  through 
"the  exceeding  riches  of  grace"  in  Christ  Jesus  to  stand  without 
accusation  in  the  presence  of  God. 


REPENTANCE— ITS   NATURE,   CONDITIONS  AND 

NECESSITY. 


H.  w.  eat:rest,  a.  m.,  ll.  d. 

This  subject  is  to  be  studied  in  the  light  of  the  Holy  Scrip- 
tures and  in  harmony  with  mental  and  moral  science.  What  any 
man  thinks,  what  any  council  may  have  decreed,  or  any  formula 
of  doctrine  may  declare,  is  of  little  worth  compared  with  the 
inspired  word.  We  listen  reverently  to  the  voice  which  came 
from  the  excellent  glory,  "This  is  my  beloved  son ;  hear  ye 
him;"  we  bow  to  him  who  said,  "All  authority  in  heaven  and  in 
earth  is  given  unto  me  ;"  and  to  those  on  the  seal  of  whose  apos- 
tleship  is  inscribed  the  legend,  "Whosoever  heareth  you  hear- 
eth  me.'' 

So  long  as  the  Savior's  declaration  shall  remain  on  record, 
"Unless  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish,"  we  cannot  over- 
estimate the  importance  of  this  subject.  From  the  want  of  thor- 
ough teaching  in  this  regard,  much  "hay,  wood  and  stubble" 
are  built  into  the  temple  of  God,  instead  of  the  "gold,  silver  and 
precious  stones."  The  workman  shall  suffer  loss  ;  and  if  saved, 
yet  it  shall  be  "so  as  by  fire." 

The  writer  would  state  at  the  outset  that  he  has  been  a 
preacher  and  a  professor  in  the  churches  and  colleges  of  the 
Christian  brotherhood  for  more  than  thirty  years,  has  been  a 
constant  reader  of  its  books  and  periodicals,  and  that  the  fol- 
lowing views  on  the  subject  of  repentance  are  in  full  accord 
with  whatever  he  has  heard  or  read  as  coming  from  the  Chris- 
tian Church. 

I.    THE  NATURE  OF  BEPENTANCE. 

1.    This  may  be  learned,  to  some  extent,  from  the  meaning 

(168) 


n.  w.  j:vi;::k.st. 


Harvkt  "\V.  Everest  was  born  at  Xorth  ITudson,  Essex  county,  New 
York,  May  lU,  1S;51.  iSegiiuiing  his  education  in  the  public  sciiools  ot  liis 
native  village,  he  afterwartls  attended,  in  succession,  Geauga  yeniinary, 
Ohio;  tlie  AV'estcrn  lleserve  Eclectic  Institute,  Hiram,  Ohio;  Bethany  College, 
W.  Va.,  and  Oberlin  College,  Oberlin,  Ohio. 

He  is  tridy  a  "  teacher  born."  At  sixteen  he  taught  a  common  school 
near  North  Hudson,  and,  since  reaching  nuxnhood,  lias  spent  the  larger  part 
of  his  lite  in  the  school-room.  "While  a  student  at  Hiram  he  served  as  tutor 
in  the  Eclectic  Institute,  and  immediately  after  his  graduation  from  Oberlin, 
became  priut-ipal  of  the  Institute,  retaining  the  position  until  It'iiiJ,  when  he 
resigned  to  accept  the  presidency  of  Eureka  College,  at  Eureka,  111. 

Leaving  Eureka  in  1S72,  he  became  pastor  of  the  Christian  Chui'ch  at 
Springliekl,  111.  In  l.'^ri  he  accepted  a  professorship  in  Kciducky  University 
at  Lexington,  remaining  there  two  years.  Then,  after  serving  as  pastor  of 
the  church  at  Normal,  111.,  for  one  year,  he  became,  in  1S77,  a  second  time, 
president  of  I^ureka  College.  In  the  spring  of  l)SSl  Jie  accepted  the  presi- 
dency of  Butler  University  at  Indianapolis,  Ind.,  and  served  there  till  18.S(j, 
when  he  Avent  to  AVicliita,  Kans.,  to  undertake  as  Chancellor  the  responsible 
and  laborious  work  of  organizing  Uartield  University.  Since  June,  lis'JU,  at 
which  time  the  University,  after  a  three  years'  career  of  unprecedented  suc- 
cess, was  forced  to  sus])end  in  consecjucnce  of  a  failure  in  the  financial  man- 
ageaicnt,  he  has  ser\  ed  as  pastor  of  the  church  at  Hutchinson,  Kans. 

It  is  but  half  praise  to  say  that  Pres.  Everest  has  filled  these  posts  of 
honor  and  responsibility,  one  and  all,  with  distinguished  fidelity  and  success, 
winning  a  reputation  second  to  none,  for  the  accuracy,  breadth  and  solidity 
of  his  scholarship;  for  his  polish,  skill,  and  power  as  a  teacher,  lecturer  and 
preacher;  for  the  ability  and  wisdom  Avith  Avhich  he  lias  administered  the 
complex  and  perplexing  affairs  of  the  A'arious  executive  offices  Avhich  he  has 
tilled;  and  crowning  all,  e\ cry  where  antl  always,  for  his  noble,  manly  bear- 
ing, and  his  iinsellish,  consecrated  Christian  character. 

Pres.  Everest  stands  in  the  front  rank  among  us,  not  only  as  scholar  and 
teacher,  but  as  preacher,  lecturer  and  Avriter.  As  a  Avriter,  especially  in  late 
years,  he  has  been  a  frc(|uent  contributor  to  our  various  magazines  and 
papers,  his  articles  everywhere  and  always  commanding  the  dcci)est  interest 
for  the  ease,  simplicity,  and  elegance  of  tlieir  literary  style,  and  the  freshness, 
wealth  and  practical  Aalue  of  their  thought.  We  may  justly  characterize 
hini  as  a  Avriter  by  saying  that  he  Avrites  always  so  that  the  "  common  peo- 
ple" may  understand  him,  and  ne\er  Avrites  Avithout  the  distinct  purpose 
before  him  of  saying  something  that  Avill  be  of  practical  bcneilt  to  his  readers. 
He  has  published  but  one  book — "  The  Divine  Hemonstration — A  Text-Book 
of  Christian  Evidence" — Avhich  Avas  issuetl  from  the  press  of  the  Christian 
Publishing  Company  in  1.S.S4,  Avhile  he  Avas  president  of  Butler  University. 
This  book  Avas  at  once  adopted  and  remains  as  a  text-book  in  most,  if  not  in 
all,  of  our  own  Bible  schools,  and,  we  notice,  has  recently  been  adopted  by 
Center  College,  Danville,  Ky.,  one  of  the  leading  Presbyterian  colleges  in  the 
United  States. 


BEPENTANCE. 


169 


of  the  word.  "Worcester  defines  the  verb  repeiit  as  follows : 
"1.  To  feel  pain  or  sorrow  on  account  of  something  one  has 
done  or  left  undone  ;  to  feel  remorse  ;  to  be  penitent ;  to  be  sorry. 
2.  To  have  such  sorrow  for  sin  as  leads  to  amendment  of  life." 
He  gives  to  the  noun  repentance  a  corresponding  significance. 
This  twofold  meaning  of  the  English  word  arises  partly  from  the 
fact  that  it  is  made  to  do  double  service  by  representing  two  very 
different  Greek  words,  metamelomai  and  metanoeo,  the  one  cor- 
responding to  the  first  definition,  the  other  to  the  second. 

Metamelomai  occurs  in  seven  passages  of  the  Greek  New 
Testament.  It  properly  expresses  an  after  care  or  concern.  It 
expresses  sufiering  rather  than  action,  the  dissatisfaction  and 
regret  which  agitate  the  soul  when  a  past  course  of  conduct  is 
seen  not  to  have  been  the  best.  It  may  denote  a  change  of 
action  as  resulting  from  this  regret,  but  not  a  change  produced 
by  a  radical  moral  transformation.  An  examination  of  the  pas- 
sages where  the  word  is  found  will  confirm  this  definition.  "  A 
man  had  two  sons  ;  and  he  came  to  the  first  and  said,  Son,  go 
work  to-day  in  the  vineyard.  And  he  answered  and  said,  I  will 
not;  but  afterward  he  repented  hiiAself,  and  went."  Matt.  21: 
28.  Here  was  regret  with  a  change  of  action,  but  no  change  of 
moral  character.  "The  Lord  sware  and  will  not  repent  himself, 
Thou  art  a  priest  forever."  Heb.  7:  21.  "For  the  gifts  and  the 
calling  of  God  are  without  repentance."  Rom.  11:  29.  The 
meaning  evidently  is  that  God  will  never  regret  and  recall  his 
appointments.  "Then  Judas,  who  had  betrayed  him,  when  he 
saw  that  he  was  condemned,  repented  himself,  and  brought 
back  the  thirty  pieces  of  silver  to  the  chief  priests  and  elders, 
saying,  I  have  sinned  in  that  I  have  betrayed  innocent  blood." 
Matt.  27:  3.  Here  there  was  regret  but  no  amendment  of  life. 
In  this  sense  Esau  "found  no  place  for  repentance  ;"  that  is,  he 
found  no  way  to  cause  his  father,  Isaac,  to  repent,  or  to  regret 
the  blessing  he  had  pronounced  upon  Jacob,  and  to  change  his 
action.  God  is  said  to  have  repented,  or  to  have  suited  his 
dealings  to  the  changing  course  of  man.    That  he  may  be 


170 


EEPENTANCE. 


unchanging  in  his  moral  character,  he  changes  his  providential 
dealings  with  men.  This  Greek  word  is  not  found  in  the  imper- 
ative mood  in  the  Christian  Scriptures.  "God  never  commanded 
any  person  to  repent  in  the  style  of  Judas,  of  whom  it  is  said  he 
repented  and  afterward  hanged  himself."  Tliis  word  is  never 
found  in  connection  with  faith,  and  is  never  enjoined  as  a  condi- 
tion of  salvation. 

The  other  Greek  word,  metanoeo,  corresponds  more  nearly  to 
the  second  definition,  though  not  precisely.  It  means  such  a 
change  of  purpose  as  leads  to  a  moral  reformation  of  life.  This 
is  the  word  employed  when  repentance  is  commanded,  or  made 
a  condition  of  salvation. 

These  two  Greek  words  are  sharply  contrasted  in  the  revised 
translation  of  2  Cor.  7 :  8,  9  :  "For  though  I  made  you  sorry 
with  my  epistle,  I  do  not  regret  it,  though  I  did  regret  it ;  for  I 
see  that  that  epistle  made  you  sorry,  though  but  for  a  season. 
Now  I  rejoice,  not  that  ye  were  made  sorry,  but  that  ye  were 
made  sorry  unto  repentance." 

2.  The  nature  of  Repentance  is  further  seen  in  the  fact  that 
it  is  commanded  of  God.  It  is  not  something  to  be  known,  nor 
something  to  be  felt,  but  something  to  be  done.  The  intellect 
and  the  sensibilities  are  not  free.  They  are  changed  by  causes 
brought  to  bear  by  self,  or  some  other  being.  Repentance  is  a 
moral  act,  a  virtuous  act,  and  hence  is  an  act  of  the  will  making 
a  radical  choice  between  right  and  wrong. 

3.  Repentance  is  an  act  of  the  soul  which  takes  place 
between  "godly  sorrow,"  on  one  side,  and  the  "fruits  meet  for 
repentance,"  on  the  other.  "For  godly  sorrow  worketh  repent- 
ance unto  salvation,  a  repentance  which  bringeth  no  regret,  but 
the  sorrow  of  the  world  worketh  death."  2  Cor.  7:  10.  Com- 
pare this  passage  with  two  others  :  "But  when  he  saw  many  of 
the  Pharisees  and  Sadducees  coming  to  his  baptism,  he  said 
unto  them.  Ye  ofl'spring  of  vij)ers,  who  hath  warned  you  to  liee 
from  the  wrath  to  come  ?  Bring  forth  therefore  fruit  worthy  of 
repentance."    Matt.  3:  7,  8.    "Wherefore,  O  King  Agrippa,  I 


REPENTANCE. 


171 


was  not  disobedient  to  the  heavenly  vision  ;  but  declared  both 
to  them  of  Damascus  first,  and  at  Jerusalem,  and  throughout  all 
the  country  of  Ju  lea,  and  also  to  the  Gentiles,  that  they  should 
repent  and  turn  to  God,  doing  works  worthy  of  repentance." 
Acts  26:19,20.  Here  "godly  sorrow''  is  the  antecedent,  and 
"fruits  worthy"  is  the  consequent  of  repentance.  The  order  of 
spiritual  experience  is  first  sorrow,  then  repentance,  then  turn- 
ing to  God,  and  then  fruits  worthy  of  repentance.  Now,  what 
is  that  act  of  the  soul  of  which  godly  sorrow  is  a  necessary  con- 
dition aud  an  overt  turning  to  God  with  an  amendment  of 
life  a  sure  result  ?  Is  it  not  that  radical  change  of  moral  pur- 
pose implied  in  an  honest  renunciation  of  all  sin  and  a  full  sur- 
render of  heart  and  life  to  God  ?    And  this  is  repentance. 

4.  The  parable  of  the  Prodigal  Son  furnishes  an  illustration 
on  the  human  plane.  The  departure  into  a  far  country,  the 
ruinous  living,  the  wicked  associates,  and  the  want  of  true 
friends,  brought  him  into  extreme  sulfering.  As  the  wretched 
boy  sat  or  walked  among  the  swine,  he  had  time  to  think.  How 
often,  in  thought,  he  must  have  revisited  the  old  home  where 
there  was  "bread  enough  and  to  spare,"  and  where  he  had  been 
blessed  with  a  mother's  love  and  a  father's  protection ;  how 
often  he  must  have  traced  his  downward  career;  and  how 
intense  must  have  been  his  self-disgust  and  remorse.  Long  and 
doubtful  must  have  been  the  soul-struggle  between  his  wicked 
heart  and  his  conscience,  between  his  pride  and  his  sense  of 
duty.  But  when,  at  length,  he  said  "I  perish  with  hunger"  and 
saw  himself,  in  the  near  future,  dead  and  torn  to  pieces  by  the 
swine,  "he  came  to  himself."  He  saw  there  was  no  need  that  he 
should  destroy  himself  and  bring  his  father's  gray  hairs  with 
sorrow  to  the  grave.  He  left  the  sleeping  swine  and,  under  the 
shadows  of  that  first  night  of  moral  sanity,  made  a  long  journey 
homeward.  Now,  when  did  he  repent  ?  His  remembrance  of 
better  days  and  his  sorrow  were  only  preparatory  to  it.  When 
he  started  home,  he  had  already  repented  and  every  homeward 
step  was  an  added  proof  that  his  repentance  was  genuine.  Was 


172 


REPENTANCE. 


it  not  when  he  changed  his  purpose,  when  he  said  "I  will  arise 
and  go  to  my  father,  and  will  say  unto  him.  Father,  I  have 
sinned  against  heaven  and  in  thy  sight :  I  am  no  more  worthy 
to  be  called  thy  son  :  make  me  as  one  of  thy  hired  servants  ?" 
Then  it  was  that  he  arose  and  came  unto  his  father,  and  then  it 
was  that  he  repented. 

An  illustrative  and  definitive  example,  on  the  plane  of  divine 
teaching,  will  be  found  in  the  case  of  the  Pentecostians.  First 
of  all,  they  were  powerfully  convicted  of  sin  in  crucifying  Jesus, 
in  crucifying  their  Messiah — and  how  terrible  a  sin  was  that ! 
They  had  heard  the  sound  of  the  Holy  Spirit's  coming  like  the 
sound  of  a  rushing  mighty  wind ;  they  had  seen  the  tongues  of 
seeming  fire  hovering  over  the  heads  of  the  apostles ;  they  had 
heard  those  Galilean  fishermen  speaking  in  all  the  languages  of 
the  gathered  multitude ;  they  had  heard  and  weighed  Peter's 
proof  that  God  had  made  that  same  Jesus  both  Lord  and  Christ 
— the  fulfillment  of  prophecy,  the  character  and  miracles  of 
Jesus,  the  testimony  of  the  apostles  to  the  fact  of  his  resurrec- 
tion, and  the  miracles  transpiring  before  them ;  and  as  a  result 
they  were  "pierced  to  the  heart"  with  a  sense  of  deep  guilt,  and 
in  anguish  of  soul  they  cried  out,  "Brethren,  what  shall  we  do  ?" 
The  apostles  commanded  them  to  repent,  commanded  them  not 
to  know  or  to  feel  something,  but  to  do  something.  It  was 
something  they  could  do,  and  could  do  at  once.  After  doing 
this  they  were  to  be  baptized.  This  repentance,  therefore,  must 
have  been  a  radical  change  of  purpose  in  regard  to  Christ ;  such 
a  change  as  led  to  an  open  confession  of  his  name,  to  baptism, 
and  to  the  Christian  life, 

5,  The  nature  of  Repentance  is  further  shown  by  some 
things  which  it  always  implies. 

(1)  It  is,  of  necessity,  the  moral  act  of  the  one  who  repents. 
No  one  can  repent  for  another.  Job  could  ofler  sacrifices  for  his 
sons,  lest  they  had  committed  some  wrong,  but  praying  fathers 
and  mothers  cannot  repent  for  their  wayward  children.  God 
cannot  repent  for  us,  nor  give  us  repentance  in  any  absolute 


REPENTANCE. 


173 


sense,  nor  compel  us  to  repent.  How  often  would  Christ  have 
gathered  the  people  of  Jerusalem  under  His  protection,  but 
they  "would  not."  God  can  turn  the  search-light  of  His  truth 
upon  our  way  and  warn  us  of  our  danger ;  He  can  bring  to  bear 
great  and  soul-stirring  motives ;  He  can  command  and  plead 
and  wait ;  but  He  cannot  compel,  for  repentance  must,  in  its 
very  nature,  be  the  soul's  own  deliberate  choice.  The  man  who 
is  waiting  for  some  power  from  without  to  change  his  purpose,  for 
some  great  tidal- wave  of  religious  excitement  to  lift  and  bear  him 
into  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  despite  his  own  lack  of  choice  and 
co-operation,  will  wait  in  vain. 

(2)  Repentance  must  be  in  the  present  tense ;  "To-day,  if 
you  will  hear  his  voice  ;  "  "  now  is  the  accepted  time,"  is  the 
language  of  heaven.  This  method  of  making  the  '  emand  is  as 
rational  as  it  is  scriptural.  To  make  up  one's  mind  that  he 
will,  in  some  future  time,  repent,  is  not  repentance.  What  is 
this  but  a  determination  to  continue  in  sin  still  other  days  and 
years?  Such  a  resolution  is  an  indication  of  deep  seated 
impenitence,  since  it  asserts  the  moral  obligation,  but  refuses 
obedience.  It  has  been  said  that  the  way  to  perdition  is 
"paved  with  good  resolutions."  This  is  not  true.  Good  resolu- 
tions do  not  lead  away  from  God,  and  a  resolution  to  repent  at 
a  more  convenient  season,  but  not  now,  is  not  a  good  resolution. 
If  heaven  should  consent  to  any  postponement  of  repentance,  it 
would  become  accessary  to  a  sinful  life.  As  soon  as  the  duty 
of  repentance  is  fully  recognized  by  the  sinner,  God  does  and 
must  demand  immediate  and  unconditional  submission. 

(3)  Again,  it  implies  a  knowledge  of  the  nature  and  demerit 
of  sin  ;  its  folly,  its  malignity,  its  defiance  of  God,  and  of  its 
soul-destroying  power.  It  involves  an  abhorrence  of  all  sin,  not 
merely  the  sin  of  Adam,  the  sins  of  man  as  a  race,  or  the  sins  of 
the  heathen,  but  the  soul's  own  personal  sins ;  a  recognition  of 
personal  guilt  before  God,  and  the  necessity  of  repentance. 
The  repentant  soul  acknowledges  the  justice  of  the  divine  law 
and  its  own  condemnation  by  it ;  it  puts  itself  in  the  wrong  and 


174 


BEPENTANCE. 


God  in  the  right,  and  utters  the  prayer  of  the  publican,  "God 
"be  merciful  to  me,  a  sinner." 

(4)  It  implies,  still  further,  the  renunciation  of  all  sin.  The 
renunciation  of  one  sin  is  the  renunciation  of  all  sin.  There 
can  be  no  mental  reservation,  no  "  darling  sins  "  not  given  up. 
It  would  be  but  an  insult  to  heaven  to  make  out  a  catalogue  of 
sins  and  say,  "These  I  loathe  and  renounce  ;  "  and  then  make 
out  another  list  and  say,  "  These  I  cannot  surrender  ;  these,  my 
dishonesty,  my  covetousness,  my  impurity,  my  wicked  ambi- 
tion, I  love  and  will  not  forsake." 

(5)  Of  course,  it  implies  the  truest  and  purest  moral  honesty. 
To  repent  with  a  purpose  to  continue  in  sin,  any  sin,  is  impossi- 
ble. To  repent  with  the  idea  that  it  is  only  the  sham  condition 
of  forgiveness,  and  that  so  a  life  of  continued  sin  and  continued 
repentance  may  lead  to  heaven,  is  but  wicked  self-deception. 
To  plan  a  life  of  sin  and  to  intend  that  at  the  close  of  life  a 
supple  repentance  shall  cheat  the  Devil  and  open  the  gates  of 
Paradise  is,  if  possible,  a  still  greater  delusion. 

(6)  Repentance  being  a  decision  made  in  the  secret  council- 
chamber  of  the  moral  nature,  the  fact  of  repentance  can  be 
absolutely  known  to  only  two  beings,  God,  the  searcher  of  all 
hearts,  and  the  repentant  soul.  If  we  repent  we  are  conscious 
of  it  and  know  it ;  and  God  knows  it.  "  What  spirit  knoweth 
the  things  of  a  man  save  the  spirit  of  the  man  which  is  in  him?" 
K  a  man  who  is  well  instructed  as  to  what  repentance  is,  says 
he  repents,  his  testimony  is  to  be  received,  unless  there  is  evi- 
dence to  the  contrary.  If  he  says  he  has  turned  about,  and  yet 
we  see  him  going  on  in  the  same  direction ;  if  there  is  reason  to 
believe  that  he  professes  repentance  on  account  of  simple  regret 
or  "  worldly  sorrow,"  or  that  he  does  so  in  order  to  escape  or 
mitigate  the  consequences  of  the  discovery  of  his  wrong-doing ; 
or  if  he  gives  evidence  of  continued  impenitence  ;  then  his 
actions  are  decisive  rather  than  his  words  ;  then  we  have  to  wait 
till  the  fruit  shall  demonstrate  the  character  of  the  tree.  The 


BEPENTANCE. 


175 


evidence  of  repentance,  therefore,  throws  some  light  on  its 
nature. 

6.  Repentance  is  a  great  revolution  in  moral  character.  It 
is  the  result  of  all  that  heaven  has  done  for  man's  salvation, 
and  it  will  be  followed  by  all  that  the  repentant  man  can  do, 
with  the  help  of  Grod,  to  save  himself.  It  is  the  enthronement 
of  conscience  and  the  bringing  into  subjection  of  all  appetites, 
passions,  and  selfish  desires.  It  is  the  soul's  response  to  the 
supreme  imperatives  "  Do  right,"  and  "  Live  benevolently 
because  this  is  right."  It  is  the  re-adjustment  of  the  will,  and 
the  bringing  of  it  into  harmony  with  nature,  law,  and  God.  It 
is  the  turning  point  in  the  soul's  career,  the  death  of  the  old 
man  and  the  birth  of  the  new,  the  transformation  of  a  rebel  into 
a  loyal  subject,  the  end  of  sinful  wandering  and  the  beginning 
of  the  homeward  journey;  the  turning  from  the  west  where  the 
night-shadows  are  gathering,  to  the  east  where  the  sun  will 
soon  arise  with  healing  in  his  wings.  It  is  the  bringing  of  the 
soul  into  relation  with  all  the  sources  of  blessing ;  the  light  of 
truth,  the  joy  of  divine  love,  the  freedom  of  pardon,  the  full 
assurance  of  hope,  and,  at  last.  Heaven  itself.  It  is  a  purpose 
"  to  fight  the  good  fight  of  faith  and  to  lay  hold  on  eternal  life." 

If  such  be  the  nature  of  repentance,  is  it  any  wonder  that 
"  God  commands  all  men,  everywhere,  to  repent,  and  that  he  is 
long-suffering,  and  not  willing  that  any  should  perish,  but  that 
all  should  come  to  repentance  ?  " 

//.    THE  CONDITION'S  AXD  CONSEQUENTS  OF  BEPENTANCE. 

1.  The  first  and  fundamental  condition  is  the  ability  to 
repent.  If  man  has  no  ability  to  repent,  it  is  as  cruel  as  it  is 
unjust  and  absurd  to  lay  upon  him  such  a  command.  If,  with 
materialists  and  agnostics,  we  shall  deny  to  him.  all  freedom, 
including  moral  freedom,  maintaining  that  all  a  man  does  he  is 
caused  and  made  to  do ;  or,  if  we  shall  maintain  that  man  is 
dead  in  trespasses  and  sins  in  such  a  sense  that,  without  imme- 


173 


REPENTANCE. 


diate  divine  aid,  be  can  "  no  more  repent  than  he  can  make  a 
world,"  and  shall' therefore  teach  men  to  wait  and  pray  for  this 
extraordinary  power,  in  either  case  we  shall  find  no  place  for 
repentance  in  any  proper  sense.  It  seems  strange  that  when  we 
come  to  religion,  men  should  be  taught  to  lay  aside  their  com- 
mon-sense; and  that  Christian  theologians  should  unite  to 
throw  these  stumbling-blocks  of  inability  in  the  way  of  the 
sinner ;  but  so  it  has  been,  and  still  is  in  theory. 

(1)  It  is  admitted  that  the  activities  of  the  mind  may  be 
classed  into  acts  of  knowing,  feeling,  and  willing ;  man  there- 
fore has  will,  he  chooses.  The  phrase,  free-will,  is  tautological, 
for  will,  in  its  very  nature,  is  free.  The  testimony  of  conscious- 
ness is  decisive ;  and  this  testimony  is,  not  that  we  have  the 
power  to  choose,  nor  that  the  will  is  free,  but  that  we  do  choose. 
Now  if  we  can  choose  between  walking  and  not  walking,  eating 
and  not  eating,  why  can  we  not  choose  between  stealing  and  not 
stealing,  lying  and  not  lying  ?  Why  can  we  not  choose  between 
rio-ht  and  wrong?  The  statement  that  we  are  unable  so  to 
choose,  is  worth  nothing  in  the  face  of  the  fact  that  we  are  con- 
stantly so  doing.  The  belief  that  we  have  the  power  of  moral 
choice  is  universal ;  it  underlies  all  civil  laws  and  penalties  ;  it 
is  the  source  of  self-apf)roval  and  of  remorse  ;  to  deny  it,  is  to 
make  man  a  machine  driven  by  forces  to  him  irresistible  ;  to 
deny  it,  is  to  deny  that  there  is  any  sin,  or  to  make  God  the 
author  of  all  sin.  Besides,  the  same  inability  which  would 
make  it  impossible  for  man  to  repent,  would  also  make  it 
impossible  for  him  to  sin,  and  so  he  would  have  no  need  of 
repentance.  This  idea  of  moral  inability  is  absurd  and,  as  a 
theological  dogma,  suicidal. 

(2)  Neither  psychology  nor  scripture  interposes  any  obstacle 
to  the  full  exercise  of  this  power.  A  motive  is  a  condition,  not 
a  cause,  of  choice ;  it  is  only  the  reason  in  view  of  which  the 
soul  chooses.  When  a  man  becomes  so  depraved  that  he  can- 
not exercise  this  moral  power,  then  he  ceases  to  be  responsible. 


EEPENTANCE. 


177 


If  all  men  are  by  nature  thus  depraved,  then  they  never  had  the 
power  to  sin  and  need  no  repentance. 

It  is  true  that  the  unconverted  man  is  spoken  of  as  being 
"dead  in  trespasses  and  in  sins."  "Let  the  dead  bury  their 
dead."  Matt.  8:  22.  "But  God,  being  rich  in  mercy,  for  his 
great  love  wherewith  he  loved  us,  even  when  we  were  dead 
through  trespasses,  quickened  us  together  with  Christ."  Eph. 
2:  5.  "And  you,  being  dead  through  your  trespasses  and  the 
uncircumcision  of  your  flesh,  you,  I  say,  did  he  quicken  together 
with  him."  Col.  2 :  13.  To  interpret  these  passages  to  mean 
that  one  is  so  dead  that  he  cannot  hear,  understand  the  gospel, 
and  obey  it,  is  to  construe  a  figure  of  rhetoric  as  though  it  were 
a  literal  statement.  "Awake,  thou  that  sleepest  and  arise  from 
the  dead,  and  Christ  shall  shine  upon  thee."  Eph.  5:  14.  This 
is  a  similar  passage,  and  yet  the  death  here  is  not  absolute,  and 
does  not  imply  inability  to  hear  the  cry,  to  awake  and  arise 
from  the  dead.  Jfor  are  we  to  understand  the  "quickening,"  or 
bringing  to  life,  in  these  passages  as  necessarily  performed 
without  means ;  the  hearing  of  the  gospel,  the  belief  with  the 
heart,  and  the  repentance  unto  life.  It  is  a  divine  work  per- 
formed with  divine  instrumentalities ;  and  among  these  instru- 
mentalities, the  soul's  own  voluntary  renunciation  of  a  sinful 
life  may  be  found.  Does  the  phrase  "dead  through  our  tres- 
passes" necessarily  refer  to  a  supposed  total  depravity  or  to  a 
moral  insensibility  ?  May  it  not  refer  to  the  soul's  condemna- 
tion on  account  of  sin,  to  its  being  death-doomed  for  this 
reason  ? 

(3)  Be  this  as  it  may,  it  is  everywhere  assumed  in  the  Bible 
that  man  has  the  power  to  repent,  and  that  he  is  responsible  for 
his  continued  impenitence.  It  is  commanded  in  many  passages 
of  which  the  following  are  examples  :  "Repent  ye,  for  the  king- 
dom is  at  hand."  "Repent  ye,  and  believe  the  gospel." 
"Repent  ye,  therefore,  and  turn  again  that  your  sins  may  be 
blotted  out."  "Repent  of  this  thy  wickedness."  "But  now  he 
commandeth  all  men  everywhere  to  repent."    Impenitence  is  a 

12 


178 


BEPENTAXCE. 


sin  and  is  distinguished  from  moral  insensibility.  "But  after 
thy  hardness  and  impenitent  heart  treasurest  up  for  thyself 
wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath."  Rom.  2:  5.  It  is  a  ground  of 
condemnation:  '"Repent,  or  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish."  It  is 
an  act  of  submission  which  God  cannot  compel,  but  which  he 
pleads  and  waits  for  with  all  long-suffering  and  compassion. 
President  Charles  G.  Finney  in  his  "Systematic  Theolog}'-," 
ipage  509,  has  the  following  paragraph,  which  presents  sound 
doctrine  on  this  subject ;  "To  deny  the  ability  of  man  to  obey 
the  commandments  of  God,  is  to  represent  God  as  a  hard  master, 
as  requiring  a  natural  impossibility  of  his  creatures  on  pain  of 
eternal  damnation.  This  necessarily  begets,  in  the  mind  that 
believes,  hard  thoughts  of  God.  The  intelligence  cannot  be  sat- 
isfied with  the  justice  of  such  a,  requisition.  In  fact,  so  far  as 
this  error  gets  possession  of  the  mind  and  gains  assent,  just  so 
far  it  naturally  and  necessarily  excuses  itself  for  disobedience, 
or  for  not  complying  with  the  commandments  of  God."  Indeed, 
one  cannot  imagine  a  better  justification  in  the  day  of  judg- 
ment than  to  be  able  to  say  truthfully,  "Lord,  thou  didst  com- 
mand me  to  repent,  but  I  was  unable  to  obey  thee." 

2.  A  second  condition  of  repentance  is  the  commission  of 
sins  to  be  repented  of.  The  sins  which  are  a  condition  of 
repentance  must  be  our  own,  personal  transgressions.  We  can- 
not repent  for  another  ;  we  cannot  repent  of  Adam's  sins  nor  for 
the  sins  of  the  race.  If  Adam  transmitted  to  us  a  depraved 
moral  nature,  we  are  sorry  for  it,  but  cannot  repent  of  it. 
"Whatever  is  done  without  moral  choice,  that  is,  without  choice 
between  right  and  wrong,  is  neither  virtue  nor  vice.  A  child, 
therefore,  which  has  not  yet  come  to  years  of  accountability,  a 
moral  imbecile,  and  one  morally  insane,  can  neither  sin  nor 
repent.  If  man  has  no  spontaneity  or  power  of  moral  choice ; 
if  he  is  compelled  by  environment,  motives,  or  anything  else,  to 
make  what  he  misnames  a  choice,  then  also  repentance  does  not 
apply  to  him.  If  an  angel  had  not  sinned,  it  could  not  repent. 
Though  it  is  said  that  Christ  "can  be  touched  with  the  feeling 


BEPENTANCE. 


179 


of  our  infirmities,"  and  that  "he  was  tempted  in  all  points  as 
we  are,"  still  it  is  added,  "Yet  without  sin."  There  is  one 
human  experience  he  never  had,  and  that  is  sin,  guilt,  sorrow, 
and  repentance  ;  for  he  was  "holy,  harmless,  undefiled,  separate 
from  sinners  and  made  higher  than  the  heavens." 

3.  A  third  condition  is  the  possession  of  the  kind  and 
the  amount  of  knowledge  and  faith  which  are  requisite  as  tlu- 
ground  of  each  act  of  repentance.  Repentance  is  not  a  blind 
feeling  or  impulsive  act.  It  implies  knowledge,  faith,  thought, 
perhaps  a  mental  struggle,  and  the  turning  of  the  will,  with  the 
whole  nature  as  a  consequence,  toward  God.  It  requires  that 
the  soul  shall  be  intelligent  and  luminous  with  moral  truth.  To 
know  one's  errors  and  to  turn  from  them  ;  to  know  that  the  life 
is  drifting  away  from  God,  and  with  one  supreme  and  decisive 
effort  to  change  its  direction  and  fix  its  eternal  orbit,  this  is 
undoubtedly  the  highest  spiritual  achievement  of  which  man  is 
capable ;  surely  such  an  act  requires  light  and  deliberation. 

(1)  It  requires  a  knowledge  of  sin  in  general  and  of  personal 
sins  in  particular.  One  must  know  something  of  the  nature  of 
sin,  and  must  recognize  his  own  sins,  before  his  repentance  can 
be  deep  and  genuine  ;  I  do  not  say  he  must  know  all  about  sin, 
for  eternity  alone  can  develop  the  malignity  of  its  real  nature. 
He  must  see  how  it  mars  and  pollutes  his  own  soul ;  fostering 
corrupt  desirp,  hardening  the  heart,  blinding  the  judgment, 
benumbing  the  conscience,  blackening  with  guilt,  and  filling  it 
with  unholy  memories  and  all  the  agonies  of  remorse ;  agonies 
which  may  become  unspeakably  intense  in  the  light  of  eternity. 
He  m.ust  see  how  his  life  of  sin  injures  and  destroys  his  brother- 
man,  leading  him,  by  example,  into  deeper  guilt,  and  at  last 
down  to  perdition.  Oh,  the  horror  of  having  blasted  another 
immortal  soul,  brother,  friend,  dearer  than  life  !  He  must  see 
what  sin  is  as  related  to  God ;  how  it  defies  his  authority,  tram- 
ples on  his  love,  and  compels  the  pouring  out  of  his  wrath ; 
must  see  it  as  the  only  thing  that  mars  God's  universe,  the  only 
thing  that  God  hates. 


180 


BEPENTANCE. 


And  not  only  the  nature  of  sin ;  lie  needs  to  recognize  the  num- 
ber, the  heinousness,  and  the  aggravation,  of  his  sins  ;  how  every- 
day and  hour  has  increased  the  long,  dark  catalogue,  and  how 
these  sins  have  been  committed  in  the  light  of  Christian  knowl- 
edge, and  against  the  holiest  impulses  of  his  nature  ;  how  they 
have  been  committed  despite  the  thunders  of  Sinai  and  the 
pleadings  of  Calvary ;  and  that  these  sins  are  the  return  he  has 
made  for  the  multiplied  blessings  and  mercies  of  the  Heavenly 
Father. 

This  self-knowledge  is  exceedingly  difficult  of  attainment. 
It  is  unwelcome  and  painful.  This  knowledge  tortures  the  soul, 
and  we  fain  would  be  ignorant  of  it.  Hence  the  memory  comes 
reluctantly  to  its  work  and  the  past  is  imperfectly  recalled. 
The  law  of  God  is  obscured  or  misinterpreted,  and  the  moral 
judgment  weakened  and  biased.  Weak  excuses  are  formed  and 
the  guilty  soul  seeks  to  hide  itself  behind  a  "refuge  of  lies." 
There  is  need  that  the  sinner  shall  be  made  to  see  himself  in  the 
light  of  God's  word  "which  is  quick  and  powerful  and  sharper 
than  a  two-edged  sword,  piercing  to  the  dividing  asunder  of  the 
soul  and  spirit  and  joints  and  marrow,  and  is  a  discerner  of  the 
thoughts  and  intents  of  the  heart ;"  there  is  need  that  the 
preacher  shall  not  "daub  with  untempered  mortar,"  but  that  he 
shall  do  substantial  work,  and  that  he  shall  expose  and  lay 
open  the  wounds  that  sin  has  made.  He  must  not  flatter  and 
bolster  up  the  sinner  in  his  sins,  but  lovingly  and  faithfully  tell 
the  truth  about  it,  the  unwelcome,  but  the  saving  truth.  Here 
the  preacher  often  fails,  so  that  the  profession  of  faith  in  Christ 
and  repentance  is  made  without  a  quiver,  without  a  tear,  or  a 
prayer  for  mercy.  There  is  need  that  the  church  shall  manifest 
its  deep  solicitude  by  its  prayers,  its  repentings,  and  its  heart- 
prompted  efforts  to  bring  men  to  Christ.  It  is  needed  that  the 
sinner  shall  have  time  to  think  on  these  things ;  that  his  atten- 
tion shall  be  secured,  the  world  of  business  and  pleasure  be 
made  to  stand  back,  and  that  the  duty  of  repentance  shall  be 
pressed  home  on  his  conscience.    The  providence  of  God  oiten 


REPENTANCE. 


181 


co-operates  with  these  efforts.  Bereavement  may  cause  a  long- 
ing to  join  the  dear  companion  who  is  now  a  saint  walking  in 
the  light  of  heaven ;  or  the  heart  may  yearn  for  the  sweet  child 
that  is  now  in  the  arms  of  Jesus. 

A  long  and  dangerous  illness  may  give  time  for  thought, 
may  quicken  the  conscience,  may  make  the  world  withdraw, 
and  may  enable  us  to  see  ourselves  in  the  fore-gleams  of  the 
judgment  day.  Or,  it  may  be  an  incidental  matter  which 
arouses  attention  and  causes  us  to  see  ourselves  as  we  are ;  the 
remark  of  a  child,  a  holy  memory  coming  from  childhood's 
days,  a  warning  given  by  some  departing  soul.  The  abject  con- 
dition and  pleading  of  the  detected  and  arrested  criminal, 
carried  the  officer  who  made  the  arrest  forward  to  the  time  when 
the  hand  of  God's  justice  would  rest  on  his  shoulder  and  call 
him  to  give  account  of  his  stewardship,  and  the  result  was  the 
officer's  conversion.  This  work  of  bringing  the  soul  to  a  knowl- 
edge of  itself  as  sinful  and  guilty  before  God,  is  often,  in  the 
Bible,  attributed  to  the  Holy  Spirit.  What  the  Spirit  does  by 
these  various  agencies — the  inspired  word,  the  efforts  of  God's 
people  who  possess  His  Spirit  and  divine  providence,  it  does 
itself;  and  so  it  continues  to  convict  the  world  of  sin.  The  use 
of  these  agencies  seems  to  give  a  full  measure  of  meaning  to 
those  scriptures  which  attribute  this  work  to  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  affords  no  encouragement  to  expect,  or  wait  for,  an  abstract, 
immediate,  and  miraculous  influence  of  the  Spirit  in  order  to 
repentance.  If  there  is  ever  given  such  influence,  it  is  a  power 
that  man  cannot  wield,  and  which  heaven  will  be  prompt  to 
apply. 

Repentance  presupposes  faith  in  Christ  as  well  as  a  knowl- 
edge of  sin.  Of  course  repentance  can  extend  no  farther  than 
knowledge  does.  The  Jew  could  exercise  repentance  toward 
God,  and  in  this  sense  the  prophets  and  John  the  Baptist  called 
the  people  to  repentance.  A  heathen  man  can  repent  of  a  sinful 
life,  though  he  may  know  nothing  of  the  true  God  nor  of  Christ. 
But  in  the  full  and  gospel  sense  of  repentance,  faith  in  Christ  as 


182 


REPENTANCE. 


one  who  offers  mercy,  is  required.  "Thus  it  is  written  and  thus 
it  behooved  the  Christ  to  sulfer  and  to  rise  from  the  dead  the 
third  day  that  repentance  and  remission  of  sins  might  be 
preached  in  his  name  among  all  nations,  beginning  at  Jerusa- 
salem."  Luke  24:  47.  What  it  was  necessary  to  preach  in  order 
to  repentance  and  remission,  it  was  also  necessary  to  believe. 
Faith  in  Jesus  furnishes  the  knowledge  and  the  chief  motives 
which  lead  men  to  repentance.  What  we  want  is  "repentance 
unto  life,"  and  this  we  could  not  have  without  Jesus  as  a  Savior. 
It  would  do  little  good  to  preach  repentance,  if  it  could  not 
avail  anything.  In  the  apostolic  preaching,  there  is,  first  of  all, 
an  effort  to  supply  knowledge  and  faith  as  the  ground  of  repent- 
ance, and  these  are  recognized  as  existing  before  repentance  is 
commanded. 

To  this  last  statement  there  is  an  apparent  exception,  but  it 
is  only  apparent.  "Repent  ye,  and  believe  the  gospel."  Mark 
1:  15,  This  was  an  exhortation  of  John  the  Baptist,  who  was 
preparing  the  way  for  Christ.  He  demanded  repentance  toward 
God,  without  regard  to  Christ ;  and  tliis  repentance  was  pre- 
ceded by  their  knowledge  of  sin  and  their  faith  in  God.  This 
repentance  would  prepare  them  to  accept  Jesus  when  his  claims 
should  be  presented  and  so  would  be  an  aid  to  faith  in  Him. 
It  is,  indeed,  generally  true,  that  if  men  would  repent  of  their 
sins  according  to  the  faith  and  knowledge  they  have,  it  would 
be  easy  for  them  to  believe  in  Christ.  Repentance  must  be  as 
progressive  as  faith  and  knowledge  are.  If  the  latter  increase, 
then  the  former  must  have  a  wider  sphere.  With  every  revelation 
of  our  sins  to  us,  there  must  be  a  corresponding  act  of  repent- 
ance; an  enlarged  repentance  is  founded  on  enlarged  knowl- 
edge and  faith. 

In  the  light  of  the  foregoing  it  is  plain  how  it  is  that  God 
gives  or  grants  repentance  ;  as  in  the  following  passages  :  "Him 
did  God  exalt  at  his  right  hand  to  be  a  Prince  and  a  Savior,  to 
give  repentance  to  Israel  and  remission  of  sins."  Acts  5 :  31. 
"To  the  Gentiles  also  hath  God  granted  repentance  unto  life." 


REPENTANCE. 


18:3 


Acts  11:  18.  "If  peradventure  God  may  give  them  repentance 
to  the  acknowledgment  of  the  truth."  2  Tim.  2:  25.  When  God 
gives  the  faith  and  tlie  knowledge  which  are  a  necessary  condi- 
tion, and  when  he  makes  it  possible  that  repentance  and  remis- 
sion of  sins  should  be  preached  in  the  name  of  Christ,  then  he 
gives  repentance.  This  is  the  only  sense  in  which  God  could 
give  or  grant  what  the  soul  itself  must  do,  for  repentance  must 
be  our  own  act. . 

4.  The  act  of  repentance  will  be  followed  by  certain  conse- 
quents, by  fruits  worthy  thereof : 

(1)  There  will  be  a  full  acknowledgment  and  confession  of 
sin ;  to  man,  so  far  as  the  sin  has  been  against  him  ;  and  to  God, 
in  whose  sight  and  against  whose  law,  all  sin  is  committed. 

(2)  There  will  be  a  prayer,  a  cry,  unto  God  for  mercy.  It  will 
be  impossible  for  sin  to  be  seen  in  its  true  nature,  without  deep 
feeling  and  earnest  prayer  for  pardon, 

(3)  An  experience  of  unusual  peace  and  joy  in  this  change 
of  purpose  will  pervade  the  soul.  The  conflict  is  ended  and 
conscience  is  triumphant.  The  soul  now  approves  itself,  it  has 
turned  towards  the  light,  it  is  adjusted  to  the  law  of  right  and 
benevolence.  The  voice  of  condemnation  is  no  longer  heard, 
the  clouds  of  divine  judgment  have  passed  over,  and  on  their 
awful  front  is  reflected  the  bow  of  promise.  This  end  of  the 
war,  this  surrender  of  the  will,  this  peace  and  joy,  are  often 
taken  for  the  evidences  of  pardon,  and  of  the  change  of  heart, 
the  regeneration  or  the  conversion  that  is  required.  Now  this 
change  of  feeling  is  no  proof  of  pardon.  It  is  an  evidence  of 
that  state  of  mind  which  caused  these  feelings,  an  evidence  and 
an  efiect  of  repentance ;  while  repentance  itself  is  only  a  part  of 
the  evidences  of  pardon,  since  it  is  only  a  part  of  the  change  con- 
templated in  conversion,  and  only  one  of  the  conditions  on 
which  pardon  is  assured. 

(4)  Restitution,  so  far  as  possible,  will  be  made.  A  repent- 
ance which  does  not  lead  to  this  is  shallow  and  ignorant  of 
what  it  implies.    The  slanderer  will  recall  his  false  words,  the 


184 


REPENTANCE. 


dishonest  man  will  give  up  his  fraudulent  gains,  and  the  repent- 
ant one  will  now  try  to  lead  to  Christ  those  whom  he  had  before 
led  astray. 

(5)  There  will  be,  at  once,  an  earnest  desire  and  effort  to 
obey  all  the  requirements  of  the  gospel  and  to  keep  the  soul  in 
subjection  to  the  law  of  God. 

(6)  These  necessary  consequences  are  the  means  by  which 
the  repentant  man  himself  and  the  world  also  may  know  that 
he  has  repented.  If  a  man  says  he  repents  we  have  to  take  his 
word  for  it,  unless  he  gives  evidences  to  the  contrary.  He  may 
himself  be  deceived.  A  man,  supposed  to  be  dying,  may  pro- 
fess repentance,  but  his  subsequent  course  may  show  that  he 
did  not  repent.  Often  in  dealing  with  men  who  have  frequently 
deceived  us,  and  in  administering  the  discipline  of  the  church, 
we  liave  to  await  the  fruits  of  repentance  as  the  only  reliable 
proof  of  the  fact.  A  member  of  the  church  commits  an  infa- 
mous wrong ;  he  is  discovered  and  convicted ;  but  he  goes  imme- 
diately before  the  church  and  confesses  his  sin  ;  the  brethren  at 
once  forgive  him,  under  the  mistaken  notion  that  this  must  be 
done  at  once,  and  his  church  relations  are  undisturbed.  Now, 
in  this  case  there  was  no  repentance,  as  the  subsequent  life  gave 
proof,  and  the  church  was  greatly  injured  by  this  settlement  of 
the  matter.  Evidently  the  church  was  not  bound  to  accept  his 
mere  profession  of  repentance,  without  greater  evidence  that  it 
was  genuine. 

THE  NECESSITY  OF  REPENTANCE. 

If  necessity  can  be  truthfully  affirmed  of  anything,  it  can  be 
of  repentance.  In  the  gradation  of  law  from  lower  to  higher, 
through  chemical,  biological,  mental  and  moral  law,  the  law  of 
duty  is  the  highest  genus.  Conscience  furnishes  the  supreme 
imperative.  What  we  ought  to  do,  we  must  do.  For  erring 
and  sinful  man,  repentance  is  a  necessity  in  a  still  larger  sense ; 
since  it  lays  the  foundation  of  all  right  moral  action. 


REPENTANCE. 


185 


1.  For  one  who  is  conscious  of  sin,  repentance  is  the  first 
duty  ;  it  is  the  only  thing  that  can  be  rightfully  done.  Shall  he 
approve  and  defend  the  wrong  ?  Shall  he  persist  and  continue 
to  walk  in  the  path  to  death  ?  How  long  shall  he  continue  to 
press  the  poison  dagger  into  his  bosom  ?  How  long  shall  he 
wait  after  feeling  the  deadly  cobra's  fangs  before  he  applies  the 
remedy  ?  How  long  shall  he  stand  where  the  quivering  thun- 
derbolt is  ready  to  fall  ?  There  is  but  one  manly  and  honorable 
thing  to  do,  and  that  is  to  confess  and  renounce  the  sin.  Not  to 
do  so  is  to  continue  in  guilt  and  rebellion.  The  only  thing  to 
do  is  to  drop  the  hot  coals  at  once ;  is  to  turn  at  once,  nor  dare 
to  take  another  step  toward  the  precipice  of  death ;  is  to  flee 
from  the  serpent  already  coiling  for  another  blow.  And  yet, 
how  slow  we  are  to  do  this !  How  often  the  soul  seems  stupe- 
fied, charmed  by  the  glittering  fascinations  of  sin !  Appetite 
and  passion  rise  against  such  a  course  ;  pride  in  a  false  consist- 
ency forbids  it ;  it  is  humiliating  to  acknowledge  our  weakness 
and  guilt,  and  our  stubborn  wills  refuse  to  yield.  Not  to  repent 
is  an  exaggeration  of  unreason  and  folly ;  not  to  repent  is  the 
mystery  of  moral  stupidity,  the  mystery  of  sin's  power  to 
harden  the  conscience  and  destroy  the  soul. 

2.  The  necessity  of  repentance  is  evident  from  the  fact  that 
God  "commands  all  men,  everywhere,  to  repent."  There  is  but 
one  thing  to  do  with  a  command  of  God,  and  that  is  to  obey  it. 
It  is  not  to  be  neglected,  trifled  with,  nor  disobeyed.  The  uni- 
versality of  this  command  shows  its  importance.  It  is  empha- 
sized by  a  threefold  promulgation :  in  the  moral  intuitions  of 
the  soul,  in  the  penalties  visited  on  wrong  doing,  and  in  the 
holy  scriptures.  It  is  a  command  which  all  men  recognize,  and 
which  is  enforced  by  the  voice  of  conscience,  a  voice  more  potent 
and  persistent  than  the  thunderings  of  Sinai. 

3.  Again,  the  necessity  of  repentance  is  seen  in  that  it  is 
made  a  part  of  the  gospel  proclamation  which  was  to  be 
preached  unto  every  creature,  and  a  condition  of  pardon  and 
admission  into  the  kingdom.    In  no  dispensation  has  Heaven 


186 


EEPENTANCE. 


ever  pardoned  and  accepted  the  impenitent.  The  sacrifices  of 
the  impenitent  were  an  abomination  to  God.  The  want  of  peni- 
tence vitiates  every  religious  institution  and  service.  To  such, 
the  word  of  God  was,  "Who  hath  required  this  at  your  hands  ?" 
"Who  hath  warned  you  to  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come  ?  God  is 
as  able  to  raise  up  children  to  Abraham  from  these  stones,"  as 
from  you  without  repentance.  "Thus  it  is  written  and  thus  it 
behooved  the  Christ  to  suffer  and  rise  from  the  dead  that  repent- 
ance and  remission  of  sins  might  be  preached  to  all  nations, 
beginning  at  Jerusalem."  None  question  the  teaching  that 
repentance  has  a  place  in  the  Great  Commission,  and  that  it  is 
a  condition  precedent  to  the  remission  of  sins  and  of  present  and 
eternal  salvation.  The  apostles,  in  the  first,  full  gospel  sermon, 
commanded  those  Avho  believed  and  asked  what  they  should  do 
to  be  saved,  "to  repent  and  be  baptized  for  the  remission  of 
sins,"  and  in  order  to  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  In  order  to 
the  knowledge  of  remission,  repentance  was  just  as  necessary  as 
baptism,  but  not  any  more  so ;  for  they  are  both  comprised  in 
the  same  command,  and  made  the  conditions  of  the  same  prom- 
ises. Under  Solomon's  porch,  Peter  said,  "Repent  and  turn  that 
your  sins  may  be  blotted  out  and  that  times  of  refreshing  may 
come  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord,"  a  command  in  perfect  har- 
mony with  that  first  given.  The  gosjDel  nowhere  promises  par- 
don to  the  impenitent,  and  it  is  distinctly  implied  that  the  Holy 
Spirit  will  not  and  cannot  dwell  in  such  a  soul. 

Nor  can  there  be  any  doubt  about  the  order  of  gospel  com- 
mands. Faith  in  God,  faith  in  Christ,  is  a  condition  of  repen- 
tance unto  life  ;  nor  can  one  truly  confess  Jesus  and  be  baptized 
into  him  without  it.  Baptism  must  have  in  it  all  that  God  has 
has  put  into  it — faith,  penitence,  confession,  prayer  and  obedi- 
ence— or  it  is  not  haptism,  but  an  empty  form,  which  God  has 
not  required.  The  necessity  of  repentance  is  evident  when  it  is 
seen  that  any  service  ofiered  to  God,  in  impenitence,  must  be 
offensive  to  Him. 

If  in  stating  the  conditions  of  salvation,  repentance  is  some- 


REPENTANCE. 


187 


times  omitted,  it  is  distinctly  implied.  "  He  that  believetli  and  is 
baptized  shall  be  saved"  said  Jesus;  but  repentance  is  implied 
both  in  true  faith  and  true  baptism.  The  jailer  of  Philippi  was 
commanded  to  believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  but  his  repentance 
was  evidenced  in  his  obedience  the  same  hour  of  the  night.  The 
commands  of  the  gospel  were  always  suited  to  the  spiritual 
condition  in  which  the  sinner  was  found.  Was  he  found  in 
unbelief?  the  command  was  to  believe.  Was  he  found  in  belief 
but  impenitence  ?  the  command  was  to  repent.  Was  he  a 
believing  penitent  but  unbaptized  ?  the  command  was  to  arise 
and  be  baptized. 

4.  The  deep  necessity  of  repentance  is  shown  in  the  fact 
that  salvation,  without  it,  is  impossible.  This  is  so  because 
repentance  and  the  new  life  which  follows  are  an  essential  part 
of  this  salvation.  We  are  to  be  saved,  not  in  sin,  but  from  sin, 
from  the  love  of  it,  its  practice,  its  guilt,  its  power.  This  salva- 
tion implies  two  things — a  change  in  man  and  a  change  in  God. 
The  first  comprises  all  that  is  meant  by  conversion,  and  the 
second  all  that  is  meant  by  pardon,  or  the  remission  of  sins. 
Conversion  is  the  turning  of  the  whole  man  toward  God,  the 
intellect,  the  sensibilities,  and  the  will ;  and  besides  these  spir- 
itual changes  conversion  includes  the  outward  changes  also,  as 
manifested  in  confession,  baptism  and  the  new  life.  Hence,  if 
there  is  no  repentance,  there  is  no  salvation.  The  soul  is  still 
"  in  the  gall  of  bitterness  and  in  the  bond  of  iniquity."  It  is 
still  sinning,  guilty,  and  under  the  condemnation  of  Heaven. 
A  man  is  not  saved  from  death  by  fire,  if  he  is  still  sinking 
amid  the  flames.  While  in  a  state  of  impenitence,  assurance, 
peace,  joy  in  God,  hope,  and  the  bliss  of  heaven,  are  utterly 
impossible.  The  sinning,  guilty,  and  impenitent  soul  carries, 
shut  up  within  itself,  the  flames  of  eternal  sufiering.  Hell  must 
first  be  in  the  soul,  before  that  soul  can  be  cast  into  hell ;  before 
that  soul  shall  go  to  its  own  place,  before  it  shall  be  left  to 
itself. 

5,  Another  reason  why  we  should  make  haste  to  repent  is 


188 


REPENTANCE. 


the  fact  tliat  while  we  remain  in  sin  we  are  "  treasuring  up 
wrath  against  the  day  of  wrath  and  the  revelation  of  God's 
righteous  judgments/'  We  are  commanded  to  repent  because 
God  has  appointed  a  day  in  which  he  will  "judge  the  world  in 
righteousness."  On  that  awful  day  when  we  shall  all  stand 
before  God,  the  wrath  of  God,  manifest  in  burning  worlds  and 
flaming  skies,  will  not  be  the  only  punishment ;  for  then  the 
treasures  of  wrath,  which  we  were  storing  up  during  days,  and 
years,  and  lives,  of  unrepented  sin,  will  be  poured  upon  us. 
Then  lost  opportunities  will  return  to  torment  us  ;  then  broken 
vows  and  black  curses  will  come  back  upon  our  own  heads  ; 
then  memory  will  pass  her  horrid  panorama  before  our  tortured 
souls ;  and  then  the  imprecations  of  those  whom  we  have 
tempted  and  lured  to  perdition  will  be  showered,  like  fiery  darts, 
upon  us.  Oh !  what  treasures  are  these,  and  who  would  not 
fear  to  increase  them  ? 

6.  Repent  or  perish  was  the  stern  but  loving  expostulation 
of  Jesus :  "  Unless  ye  repent,  ye  shall  all  likewise  perish."  To 
the  drunkard  nature  says,  "  Repent  or  perish,"  and  every  year 
sixty  thousand  inebriates,  in  this  country  alone,  verify  the 
warning.  "  Repent  or  perish "  cries  wisdom  to  the  tens  of 
thousands  who  are  spending  their  patrimony  of  health  and  life 
in  ruinous  living ;  and  from  beds  of  pain  where  debauchery  is 
torturing  the  body ;  from  prison  cells  where  young  men  strive 
in  vain  to  wrench  off  their  chains  ;  and  from  the  gallows-stage 
where  the  noosed  rope  dangles  and  youthful  eyes  look  their 
last  on  earth  and  sky,  this  warning  is  repeated  with  startling 
emphasis.  "  Repent  or  perish,"  like  a  voice,  from  heaven,  falls 
on  the  ear  of  one  who  would  push  his  way  into  the  far  north, 
and  is  heard  above  the  roar  of  the  cataract  by  the  one  who  is 
carelessly  floating  down  Niagara's  tide.  But  nature  does  not 
turn  backward  on  its  iron  way ;  still  Niagara  roars  and  death 
is  rained  from  the  frozen  sky ;  still  alcohol  poisons  and  maddens 
blood  and  brain ;  and  still  lechery,  with  reeking  hand,  hurls  the 
rotting  soul  and  body  into  the  grave.    Are  mental  and  moral 


BEPENTANGE. 


189 


laws  less  inexorable  ?  Can  earth  or  heaven  afford  that  they 
shall  be  less  certain?  Intuition,  reason,  and  all  human  experi- 
ence catch  up  and  roll  onward  the  Savior's  thunder-peal  of 
warning,  "  Repent  or  perish,*'  "  Repent  or  perish  !  " 

7.  This  necessity  is  seen  in  the  proffered  mercy  and  entreaty 
of  heaven.  Think  of  the  long  ages  of  preparation  before  the 
Savior  came ;  of  the  long  lines  of  patriarchs  and  prophets  who 
suffered ;  of  the  humiliation  and  agonies  of  the  Son  of  God ;  of 
the  cross  and  the  grave;  of  the  martyr  church  and  its  testi- 
mony ;  and  all  this  "  that  repentance  and  remission  of  sins 
might  be  preached  in  his  name  among  all  nations."  Think 
why  heaven  pleads  with  men  :  "  Turn  ye,  turn  ye,  for  why  will 
ye  die  ? "  how  Jesus  besought,  "  Come  unto  me,  all  ye  who 
labor  and  are  heavy-laden ; "  how  the  Apostles  plead,  "  We 
beseech  you,  in  Christ's  stead,  be  ye  reconciled  to  God ;  "  and 
the  last  words  of  God  to  man,  "  The  Spirit  and  the  bride  say. 
Come  ;  let  him  that  heareth  say,  Come ;  and  whosoever  will,  let 
him  take  the  water  of  life  freely."  And  would  all  this  have 
been  done,  if  repentance  is  not  a  necessity  ?  Would  Heaven 
wait  and  entreat,  if  it  could  save  us  without  our  consent  and 
co-operation  ? 

8.  God  having  done  in  our  behalf  what  he  has,  and  genuine 
repentance  being  always  followed  by  a  new  life,  it  is  plain  that 
repentance  is  the  pivot  on  which  the  whole  matter  turns.  If  the 
sinner  will  repent  it  may  all  be  well ;  but  if  he  will  not,  then 
eternal  banishment  from  God  must  await  him.  On  this  point 
Heaven  brings  to  bear  all  its  influence,  and  to  this  effect  are  all 
the  teachings,  prayers,  and  entreaties  of  the  church.  It  is  over 
this  matter  of  repentance,  this  submission  of  the  will  to  the 
authority  of  God,  that  the  battle  rages  most  fiercely  in  the  soul 
of  the  convicted  sinner.  When  all  has  been  done ;  when 
Heaven  has  exhausted  its  means,  and  human  hearts  have  poured 
out  their  sympathy  and  love  and  persuasion,  then  the  soul  must 
stand  alone  with  God,  then  it  must  confront  and  decide  its  own 
destiny,  eternal  life  or  eternal  death. 


190 


BEPENTANCE. 


9.  And  yet  even  here,  God  makes  a  last  and  highest  mani- 
festation of  his  love  and  desire  to  save,  by  declaring  that  a 
rejection  of  Christ  and  a  refusal  to  repent  is  the  only  sin  that  it 
will  not  and  cannot  forgive.  A  refusal  to  accept  Jesus  and  to 
be  forgiven  cuts  the  soul  off  from  all  means  of  salvation ;  "  for 
there  is  no  other  name  given  under  Heaven  and  among  men 
whereby  we  must  be  saved."  The  unpardonable  sin  is  the 
final  refusal  to  be  pardoned. 


John  B.  Briney  was  born  in  Nelson  county,  Ky.,  Feb.  11,  1839.  He 
lived  on  tlie  farm,  and  performed  the  usual  work  of  a  farmer's  boy  until  lie 
was  sixteen  years  of  age,  attending  school  at  the  country  log  scliool-liouse, 
wliere  many  an  embryonic  statesman,  tlieologian  and  jurist  has  had  his 
beyiuning.  This  particular  schi)ol  lasted  only  during  the  winter  months, 
anil  the  subject  of  this  sketch  enjoyed  its  advantages  for  three  winters.  At 
the  age  of  sixteen,  when  most  boys  of  spirit  think  of  doing  soutetliing  for 
them-elves,  he  apprenticed  hiuiself  to  a  builder  to  learn  the  carpenter  trade. 
He  served  his  apprenticeship  of  llu'ce  years,  receiving  for  tiie  first  year  8-><-', 
for  the  second  .?-lU,  and  for  the  third  $50.  He  was  married  Sept.  25,  18G1,  to 
Miss  Luciatla  Halbert,  of  Nelson  county,  Ky.,  and  entered  Eminence  College 
in  that  (State  one  year  thereafter,  taking  a  four  years'  course.  He  became 
pastor  of  the  Eminence  Church  one  year  before  leaving  school,  and  served 
the  congregation  three  years.  From  Eminence  he  went  to  Millersburg, 
where  he  labored  two  years,  removing  thence  to  Winchester,  where  he  was 
located  with  the  church  four  years.  His  next  pastorate  was  Maysville, 
where  he  remained  six  years.  His  last  pastorate  in  Kentucky  was  with  the 
church  at  Covington,  where  he  labored  two  and  a  half  years.  He  Avas  State 
Evangelist  in  Kentucky  two  years,  and  edited  the  Aijostolic  Times  two  years, 
showing  great  strength  as  a  writer. 

In  January,  18«ij,  he  became  pastor  of  the  Linden  Street  Church,  Mem- 
phis, Tcnn.,  where  he  labored  with  great  acceptance  until  his  resignation  in 
July,  1888.  During  his  residence  in  Memphis  he  conducted  a  Southern 
Department  in  the  L'hristiun- Ecu injcli^t ^  Avhicli  dealt,  in  a  very  vigorous  way, 
with  certain  erroneous  theories  which  had  impeded  the  progress  of  our  cause 
in  the  South.  He  removed  to  Springlield,  111.,  in  July,  1888,  where  iie 
served  as  pastor  in  that  capital  city  until  January,  1891,  when  he  resigned  to 
accept  a  call  from  Tacoma,  Washington,  where  it  was  expected  lie  would 
render  valuable  service  in  developing  tiie  interest  of  our  cause  in  that  young 
State.  While  preparing  to  go  to  liis  western  field  of  labor,  he  met  with  the 
unfortunate  accident  of  Feb.  od,  in  which  his  hip  was  fractured  by  a  fall,  and 
which  frustrated  all  his  plans.  He  is  still  at  Si)ringtield,  awaiting  liis  recov- 
ery, so  far  as  this  may  be  possible.  He  Jias  held  about  fifteen  oral  delmtes 
and  several  newspaper  discussions  Avitli  representative  men.  His  brethren 
clierisii  the  hope  that  his  accident,  thougli  it  may  cripple  him  for  life,  may 
not  seriously  interfere  with  his  great  usefulness  in  the  cause  of  religi<jus 
reformation.  The  work  he  has  already  planned,  and  upon  which  lie  has 
already  entered,  indicates  that  his  sphere  of  inlluence  will  be  widened, 
rather  than  limited,  by  the  accident  which  incapacitates  him  for  the  active 
duties  of  a  pastor's  life. 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 


J.  B.  BRINEY. 
/.    ITS  ACTION. 

In  revealing  his  will  to  man  it  pleased  the  Lord  to  make  use 
of  human  language  as  the  medium  of  communication.  In  the 
accomplishment  of  his  purpose  in  this  regard  he  did  not  invent 
a  new  language,  but  selected  one  already  in  use  and  well 
understood  by  the  people  who  spoke  it.  Hence,  if  we  would 
understand  the  Lord's  will  concerning  us,  and  our  duty  to  him, 
we  must  become  acquainted  with  the  meaning  of  the  words 
employed  by  him  in  making  his  will  known.  As  he  neither 
invented  a  new  language  in  which  to  couch  his  will,  nor  gave 
notice  of  the  use  of  the  words  of  an  old  language  in  a  new 
sense,  the  words  which  he  did  use  must  be  taken  in  the  sense  in 
which  they  were  generally  understood  by  those  who  were 
familiar  with  the  language  in  which  the  divine  revelation  was 
made.    In  no  other  way  can  the  will  of  God  be  ascertained. 

The  Lord  made  choice  of  the  Greek  tongue  as  the  means  of 
communicating  his  will  to  man  as  regards  the  New  Covenant. 
One  of  the  prominent  terms  used  in  the  Greek  New  Testament 
is  the  word  haptizo,  and  it  is  so  used  as  to  involve  an  act  of 
obedience  on  the  part  of  those  who  would  accept  Christ  and 
submit  to  his  authority.  What  that  act  is  depends  upon  the 
meaning  of  this  word  as  used  by  the  people  who  spoke  the 
Greek  language  when  the  New  Testament  was  written.  The 
question  does  not  relate  to  the  meaning  of  baptize  as  an 
English  word,  for  this  word  was  incorporated  into  the  English 
language  many  centuries  after  the  Lord's  will  was  expressed  in 
human  speech,  and  is,  therefore,  much  too  young  to  testify  as 
to  the  meaning  of  the  word  employed  by  the  Holy  Spirit. 

(191) 


192  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 


Recognition  of  this  one  manifest  fact  is  of  immense  value  to  the 
student  of  this  subject.  The  question  relates  simply  to  the 
meaning  of  the  Greek  word  haptizo  as  this  word  was  used  and 
understood  by  Greek-speaking  people  eighteen  centuries  ago. 
Whatever  the  word  meant  then  is  what  the  Lord  would  have 
done  by  all  those  who  would  obey  him.  Hence  the  question  is 
largely  a  simple  matter  of  history,  to  be  determined  as  all 
other  questions  of  this  character  are  determined. 

The  duty  before  us  is  now  plain.  We  are  to  discover  how 
Greek-speaking  people  understood  this  word  when  the  Savior 
said,  "  Go  disciple  all  nations,  baptizing  them."  As  far  as  it 
can  be  done,  let  the  reader  dismiss  all  ideas  that  have  hitherto 
been  received  on  this  subject,  and  examine  what  follows  as  if  it 
were  something  entirely  new.  The  examples  that  follow  are 
taken  from  Dr.  Conant's  work  entitled  ^'Baptizein,''''  and  the 
Anglicised  word  baptize  is  used  to  represent  the  Greek  word 
haptizo,  thus  leaving  the  meaning  of  the  term  to  be  pointed  out 
by  the  context. 

1.  Pindar,  an  ancient  Greek  poet,  born  B.  C.  522,  regarding 
life  as  a  sea,  and  likening  himself  to  a  cork  on  a  fisher's  net, 
says : 

"  For,  as  when  the  rest  of  the  tackle  is  toiling  deep  in  the 
sea,  I,  as  a  cork  above  the  net,  am  unhaptized  in  the  brine." 

The  cork  is  2t7i-baptized  because  it  is  not  drawn  under  the 
water.  In  the  estimation  of  this  ancient  Greek  writer,  so  long 
as  a  cork  floats  on  water  it  is  not  baptized.  The  import  of  the 
word  as  here  used  is  plain. 

2.  Polybius,  a  Greek  historian,  who  was  born  B.  C.  205,  in 
describing  a  spear  used  in  taking  the  sword-fish,  says  : 

"And  even  if  the  spear  falls  into  the  sea,  it  is  not  lost ;  for  it 
is  compacted  of  both  oak  and  pine,  so  that  when  the  oaken  part 
is  'baptized  by  the  weight,  the  rest  is  buoyed  up,  and  is  easily 
recovered." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  respecting  the  meaning  of  the  word 
as  used  by  this  author.    That  part  of  the  spear  which  was 

t 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  193 

pulled  below  the  surface  of  the  water  by  the  weight  of  the  iron 
point,  is  said  to  have  been  baptized,  while  the  part  that  was 
buoyed  up  and  stood  above  the  water  was  regarded  as  not 
baptized. 

3.  The  same  writer,  in  his  account  of  the  fording  of  the 
river  Tebia  by  the  Roman  army,  says  : 

"They  passed  through  with  difficulty,  the  foot-soldiers  bap- 
tized as  far  as  to  the  breasts." 

This  is  a  very  striking  case.  These  soldiers  are  spoken  of 
as  wading  breast-deep  in  water,  and  they  are  said  to  have  been 
baptized  only  to  the  extent  that  their  bodies  were  under  the 
water — that  part  of  their  persons  which  was  above  the  water 
being  excepted  from  the  baptism. 

4.  In  a  work  on  geography,  Strabo,  who  was  born  about  B. 
C.  60,  speaking  of  a  certain  passage  through  which  the  river 
Pyramus  Hows,  says  : 

"And  to  one  who  hurls  down  a  dart  from  above  into  the 
channel,  the  force  of  the  water  makes  so  much  resistance  that  it 
is  hardly  baptized.'''' 

Of  course  the  dart  came  in  contact  with  the  water,  and  was 
made  wet ;  but  it  was  hardly  baptized  because  it  hardly  went 
under  the  water. 

5.  The  same  writer,  in  describing  the  march  of  Alexander's 
army  on  a  certain  occasion,  says  : 

"Alexander,  happening  to  be  there  at  the  stormy  season, 
and  accustomed  to  trust  for  the  most  part  to  fortune,  set  for- 
ward before  the  swell  subsided,  and  they  marched  the  whole 
day  in  water,  baptized  as  far  as  to  the  waist." 

This  example  is  similar  to  the  one  taken  from  Polybius. 
The  soldiers  marched  in  water  {en  hudati)  waist-deep,  and 
Strabo  speaks  of  them  as  baptized  only  to  the  extent  that  they 
were  beneath  the  surface  of  the  water. 

6.  The  same  author,  writing  about  the  immense  quantity  of 

salt  held  in  solution  by  the  waters  of  the  lake  Tatta  in  Phrygia, 

says  : 
13 


194  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 

"  The  water  solidifies  so  readily  around  everything  that  is 
baptized  into  it  {eis  auto),  that  they  draw  up  salt-crowns  when 
they  let  down  a  circle  of  rushes." 

The  wayfaring  man,  though  illiterate,  can  have  no  doubt 
about  the  meaning  of  the  word  as  used  by  this  writer. 

7.  In  a  medical  work  of  uncertain  date,  but  probably 
written  before  Christ,  the  author,  in  describing  the  respiration 
of  a  patient  who  was  afflicted  with  throat  trouble,  says  : 

"And  she  breathed  as  persons  breathe  after  having  been 
baptized,  and  emitted  a  low  sound  from  the  chest,  like  the 
so-called  ventriloquist." 

This  example  has  such  a  decisive  bearing  on  the  subject  in 
hand,  that  it  is  proper  to  pay  particular  attention  to  it.  Here 
is  a  case  of  interrupted  breathing  on  account  of  inflammation 
and  swelling  of  the  throat.  Such  interrupted  breathing  a  phy- 
sician of  that  day  likens  to  the  breathing  of  people  just  after 
being  baptized.  Baptism,  then,  was  something  that  interfered 
with  breathing,  thus  furnishing  a  physician  with  an  illustration 
of  the  breathing  of  his  patient.  Let  it  be  observe'd,  too,  that  it 
is  not  said  she  breathed  as  some  persons  breathe  after  baptism, 
thus  indicating  that  baptism  might  be  so  performed  as  not  to 
interfere  with  respiration.  The  statement  implies  an  interrup- 
tion of  breathing  in  every  case  of  baptism.  In  no  case  does  a 
slight  affusion  of  water  upon  tlie  head  or  any  other  part  of  the 
body  interfere  with  breathing.  Hence,  if  this  ancient  physician 
had  had  any  idea  that  baptism  could  be  accomplished  by 
sprinkling  or  pouring  a  little  water  uj^on  a  person,  he  would 
not  have  used  this  illustration  of  the  symptoms  of  his  patient. 

8.  Josephus,  who  was  born  A.  I).  37,  wrote  his  history  in 
the  Greek  language  about  the  time  the  New  Testament  was 
written.  In  his  account  of  the  destruction  of  the  boy  Aristo- 
bulus,  who,  by  Herod's  command,  was  drowned  by  his  compan- 
ions in  a  swimming  bath,  he  says  : 

"  Continually  pressing  down  and  haptizing  him  while  swim- 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  195 

ming,  as  if  in  sport,  they  did  not  desist  till  they  had  entirely 
sulfocated  him." 

This  example  is  doubly  important  because  it  is  from  the 
writings  of  a  Greek- speaking  Jew  who  lived  in  the  apostolic 
age,  and  in  the  very  country  where  the  Greek  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment was  in  use.  Hence  this  case  throws  a  strong  light  on  the 
word  baptize  as  used  in  the  New  Testament.  A  boy  accus- 
tomed to  aquatic  sports  would  laugh  at  any  effort  to  show  that 
the  word,  as  here  used,  suggests  anything  less  than  dipping. 

9.  Plutarch,  who  was  born  A.  D.  50,  speaking  of  the  skill 
of  the  bird  called  the  Halcyon  in  so  constructing  her  nest  that 
it  would  float  on  the  water,  says  : 

"  That  which  is  moulded  by  her,  or  rather  constructed  with 
the  shipwright's  art,  of  many  forms,  the  only  one  not  liable  to 
be  overturned,  nor  to  be  haptized.^'' 

This  case  is  very  forcible  and  important  from  several  points 
of  view.  This  bird's  nest  floated  upon  the  water  and  was  in 
contact  with  it.  Still  it  was  not  baptized,  and  therefore  Plut- 
arch did  not  regard  mere  contact  with  water  as  baptism.  Being 
in  contact  with  water  the  nest  was  of  course  wetted,  but  it  was 
not  baptized.  Therefore  this  writer  did  not  look  upon  a  mere 
wetting  as  baptism.  It  rained  upon  the  nest,  for  it  rains  as 
much  on  sea  as  on  land.  The  word  rain  is  quite  similar  to  the 
Greek  word  raino,  which  means  to  sprinkle.  The  English  word 
rain  sustains  about  the  same  relation  to  the  Greek  word  ramo, 
that  baptize  does  to  baptizo.  The  nest  being  rained  upon  was 
sprinkled,  but  it  was  not  baptized,  and  hence  Plutarch  did  not 
regard  sprinkling  as  baptism.  This  example  has  both  a 
positive  and  negative  bearing  on  the  subject  under  considera- 
tion. It  shows  that  in  the  estimation  of  this  distinguished 
Greek  writer  baptism  involves  submersion,  and  that  he  did  not 
regard  sprinkling,  or  wetting,  or  mere  contact  with  water,  as 
baptism.  The  nest  was  not  liable  to  be  baptized  simply 
because  it  was  not  liable  to  go  under  the  water. 

10.  Referring  to  Agamemnon  the  same  writer  says  : 


196  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTIOX,  SUBJECTS  AXD  IMPOST. 

"  Then  bravely  baptizing  liimself  into  the  lake  Copias,  that 
there  he  might  extinguish  his  love,  and  be  freed  from  desire." 

11.  In  his  life  of  Alexander,  describing  the  conduct  of  the 
Grecian  army  while  returning  from  the  East  the  same  author 
says : 

"  Thou  wouldst  not  have  seen  a  buckler,  or  a  helmet,  or  a 
pike ;  but  the  soldiers  along  the  Avhole  way,  haptizing  with 
cups,  and  horns,  and  goblets,  from  great  wine-jars  and  mixing- 
bowls,  were  drinking  to  one  another." 

Both  of  these  examples  are  interesting  and  instructive.  The 
first  one  represents  a  man  as  baptizing  himself  into  a  lake. 
No  reasonable  doubt  can  arise  as  to  the  nature  of  that  transac- 
tion.   The  man  plunged  himself  into — eis — the  lake. 

The  last  one  takes  us  into  practical,  every  day  life,  and 
shows  us  by  what  we  there  see,  the  meaning  of  this  word.  The 
boatman  procures  water  by  dipping  it  from  the  river  with  his 
bucket ;  people  dip  liquid  from  vessels  with  cups,  dippers,  etc. ; 
Alexander's  soldiers  baptized,  or  dipped  wine  from  jars  and 
bowls  with  cups,  horns,  and  goblets.  When  a  soldier  put  his 
cup  into  wine  contained  in  a  jar  or  bowl,  he  is  said  by  Plutarch 
to  have  baptized-  with  it.  This  is  so  plain  that  to  dwell  upon  it 
would  be  a  reflection  upon  the  intelligence  of  the  reader.  The 
act  performed  by  the  soldiers  in  filling  their  cups  and  goblets  is 
perfectly  obvious.  That  act  the  Greek  language,  by  the  pen  of 
one  of  its  noted  writers,  calls  baptism. 

12.  Lucian,  a  Greek  Avriter  born  about  A.  D.  135,  records 
the  following  rule  adopted  by  the  '  Man-hater"  to  indicate  his 
hostility  to  mankind : 

"  And  if  the  winter's  torrent  were  bearing  one  away,  and  he 
with  outstretched  hands  were  imploring  help,  to  thrust  even  him 
headlong,  baptizing  [him],  so  that  he  should  not  be  able  to 
come  up  again." 

Comment  would  be  out  of  place  here. 

13.  Chrysostom,  a  Greek  Christian  who  was  born  A.  D. 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  197 

347,  in  contrasting  the  Savior's  cures  with  those  accomplished 
by  ordinary  Imman  surgery,  says  : 

"  But  here  no  such  thing  is  seen ;  no  fire  [caustic]  applied, 
nor  steel  [knife]  baptized,  nor  flowing  blood." 

Inserting  a  knife  into  flesh  is  here  called  baptizing  it,  and 
this  shows  plainly  that  this  "  Father "  in  the  early  Greek 
Church  had  no  other  idea  of  baptism  than  that  it  was  the  put- 
ting of  something  into  something. 

14.  Achilles  Titius,  a  Greek  writer  of  the  fifth  century,  in 
his  description  of  the  Egyptian  boatman's  way  of  drinking 
water,  says  : 

"  For  their  drinking  cup  is  the  hand.  For  if  any  of  them  is 
thirsty  while  sailing,  stooping  forward  from  the  vessel  he  directs 
his  face  towards  the  stream,  and  lets  down  his  hand  into  water 
[els  to  Jiudor'] ;  and  baptizing  it  hollowed,  and  filling  it  with 
water,  he  darts  the  draught  towards  his  mouth,  and  hits  the 
mark." 

This  example,  like  all  the  rest,  is  very  forcible.  The  sailor 
filled  his  hollowed  hand  by  letting  it  down  into  the  water,  thus 
baptizing  it. 

15.  In  his  story  of  Clitophon  and  Leucippe  the  same  writer 
says  : 

"  And  there  is  a  fountain  of  gold  there.  They  baptize  into 
the  water  \_eis  to  liudor\  therefore,  a  pole  smeared  with  pitch, 
and  open  the  barriers  of  the  stream.  And  the  pole  is  to  the 
gold  what  the  hook  is  to  the  fish,  for  it  catches  it ;  and  the  pitch 
is  a  bait  for  the  prey." 

The  meaning  of  baptize  as  here  used  is  perfectly  plain,  and 
in  the  matter  of  getting  gold  from  the  bottom  of  a  river  by 
baptizing  a  pole,  there  would  be  no  diversity  of  opinion.  It 
would  never  occur  to  any  mind  that  the  gold  might  be  obtained 
by  sprinkling  or  pouring  water  on  a  pole  near  the  river ! 

We  now  have  before  us  fifteen  examples  of  the  use  of  the 
word  under  consideration.  The  number  could  be  increased  ten- 
fold without  the  least  variation  of  the  meaning  attached  to  the 


198  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTIOX,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 

word  by  those  who  wrote  the  foregoing  passages.  These  writers 
represent  a  period  of  about  one  thousand  years,  and  from  their 
use  of  the  word  baptize  it  appears  that,  during  that  period,  it 
expressed  the  idea  of  insert  ion  into,  or  immersion.  The  New 
Testament  was  written  about  the  middle  of  the  period  just  men- 
tioned, and  was  written  in  the  language  to  which  the  word  now 
under  investigation  belonged.  At  that  very  time  Greek  speak- 
ers and  writers  were  using  this  word  to  signify  immersion 
wherever  the  Greek  language  was  known.  Is  it  reasonable  to 
suppose  that  New  Testament  writers  turned  this  word  out  of  its 
usual  channel,  and  used  it  in  a  sense  wholly  unknown  to  the 
literature  of  that  day?  There  is  nothing  to  justify  so  harsh  a 
conclusion.  If  the  Lord  meant  to  be  understood,  he  certainly 
would  not  have  employed  an  important  word  in  a  sense  radi- 
cally different  from  that  in  which  the  people,  to  whose  language 
it  belonged,  were  accustomed  to  use  it. 

The  words  of  Bishop  Middleton,  as  quoted  by  Dr.  Bloom- 
field,  are  so  pertinent  to  this  point,  that  I  insert  them  with  pleas- 
ure : 

"It  is  better  to  understand  phrases  according  to  their  obvious 
import,  even  though  we  should  be  compelled  to  leave  the  proof 
of  their  fitness  to  more  fortunate  inquiry.  When  once  we  begin 
to  withhold  from  words  their  ordinary  and  natural  signification, 
we  must  not  complain  if  Infidels  charge  our  religion  with  mysti- 
cism, or  its  expositors  with  fraud." 

To  this  "golden  rule"  of  interpretation  Dr.  Bloomfield  adds 
the  following : 

"Words  and  phrases  must  not  be  taken  in  some  recondite 
sense,  which  men  of  learning  and  ingenuity,  in  support  of  an 
h3q:)othesis,  may  devise  ;  but  in  the  ordinary  sense  of  the  words, 
wherein  the  persons  addressed,  whether  by  preaching  or  writ- 
ing, would  be  likely  to  understand  them." 

Adherence  to  these  plain,  common-sense  rules  will  guard 
against  erroneous  conclusions  with  respect  to  the  import  of  lan- 
guage, while  departure  therefrom  cannot  but  be  mischievous. 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 


199 


From  the  examples  of  the  use  of  the  word  baptize,  that  have  just 
passed  under  review,  what  would  Greek-speaking  men,  such  as 
Pindar^  Polybius,  Plutarch,  Strabo,  Joseplius,  Lucian,  etc.,  have 
understood  the  word  "baptize,"  as  used  in  the  New  Testament, 
to  mean?  The  answer  is  obvious.  Now,  we  must  take  this 
word  in  the  same  sense  that  they  would  have  assigned  to  it,  or 
expose  our  holy  religion  to  the  just  charge  of  mysticism,  or  its 
expositors  to  the  more  serious  charge  of  fraud,  Bishop  Middle- 
ton  and  Dr.  Bloomfield  being  judges. 

Our  examination  of  the  term  "baptize,"  as  found  in  Greek 
literature,  seems  to  justify  the  following  conclusins  : 

1.  The  subject  of  the  verb  in  the  active  form, — the  one  who 
did  the  baptizing, — always  handled  the  ijerson  or  thing  bap- 
tized, and  never  the  element. 

2.  JVo  mere  wetting^  nor  contact  with  water,  nor  sprink- 
ling, was  regarded  as  haptism. 

3.  The  idea  of  submersion  was  always  present  with  the 
word  as  used  by  the  Greeks. 

4.  The  extent  of  the  submersion  was  the  extent  of  the  bap- 
tism— '^baptized  as  far  as  to  the  breast.'''' 

5.  No  person  with  a  reputation  for  scholarship  at  stake, 
would  use  sprinkle  or  pour  to  translate  baptizo  as  used  in  any 
passage  of  ancient  Greek  literature. 

6.  The  '■'ordinary  and  natural'^  signification  of  the  word  is 
to  dip  or  immerse. 

II.    LEXICAL  AUTIIOBITY. 

We  now  come  to  the  lexicons.  It  is  important  to  remember 
that  it  is  not  the  business  of  makers  of  dictionaries  to  make 
meanings  of  words.  Their  work  is  to  collate  and  present  in 
proper  form  the  meanings  attached  to  words  by  those  who  write 
and  speak  the  language.  Hence  lexicons  are  a  secondary  source 
of  information  on  this  subject,  the  primary  and  ultimate  source 
being  usage.    It  may  be  supposed,  however,  that  the  lexicons 


200  BAPTIS3I—ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AXD  IMPORT. 


are  based  upon  usage,  and  hence,  tliey  are  to  be  regarded  as 
important  in  tlie  investigation  that  Ave  are  now  conducting. 
There  is  no  higher  authority  in  modern  lexicography  than  the 
authors  quoted  below.  The  first  of  these  shall  be  introduced  to 
the  reader  by  the  American  Cyclopedia  : 

"Sophocles,  Evangeliuus  Apostolides,  an  American  scholar, 
born  near  Mt.  Pelion,  Thessaly,  March  8,  1807.  He  studied  in 
the  convent  on  Mt.  Sinai,  emigrated  to  the  United  States, 
entered  Amherst  college  in  1829,  taught  school,  and  was  tutor 
in  Greek  in  Harvard  college  in  1842-5  and  1847-59.  He  was 
then  appointed  assistant  professor  of  Greek  there,  and  in  1860 
professor  of  ancient  Byzantine,  and  modern  Greek.  He  received 
the  degree  of  A.  M.  from  Yale  college  in  1837,  and  from  Harvard 
college  in  1847,  and  that  of  LL.  D.  from  the  Western  Reserve 
college  in  1862,  and  from  Harvard  college  in  1868." 

This  eminent  scholar,  in  his  Greek  Lexicon  of  the  Roman 
and  Byzantine  p-riods,  defines  taptizo  thus:  "To  dip;  to 
immerse ;  to  sink."  The  Latinized  word  he  defines  thus : 
'■^mergo,  mergito,  tingo  or  tiiiguo.''''  To  this  definition  he 
appends  the  following  note  :  "There  is  no  evidence  that  Luke 
and  Paul  and  the  other  writers  of  the  New  Testament  put  upon 
this  verb  meanings  not  recognized  by  the  Greeks."  This  dis- 
tinguished scholar  here  says  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  New 
Testament  meaning  of  baptize  is  different  from  the  meaning 
attached  to  it  by  the  Greeks ;  i.  e.,  "dip,  immerse,  sink." 

In  his  Biblico-Theological  Lexicon  of  New  Testament  Greek, 
Cremer,  a  celebrated  German  lexicographer,  defines  the  verb 
thus  :  "To  immerse,  to  submerge."  Besides  this  definition  of 
ha'ptizo  as  used  in  the  Scriptures,  the  author  says  :  "The  pecu- 
liar New  Testament  and  Christian  use  of  the  word  to  denote 
immersion,  submersion  for  a  religious  purpose  to  baptize,  John 
1:  25,  ti  oun  baptizeis  may  be  pretty  clearly  traced  back  to  the 
"Levitical  washings,"  etc. 

Dr.  Joseph  Henry  Thayer,  Bussy  Professor  of  New  Testa- 
ment Criticism  and  Interpretation  in  the  Divinity  school  of  Har- 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  201 

vard  University,  in  his  Greek-English  Lexicon  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, defines  haptizo  as  follows  :  "1.  Prop,  to  dip  repeat- 
edly, to  immerse,  submerge.  2.  to  cleanse  by  dipping  or  sub- 
merging, to  wash,  to  make  clean  with  water ;  in  the  mid.  and  1st 
Aor.  pass,  to  wash  one's  self,  to  bathe.  2.  metaph.  to  over- 
whelm, to  be  overwhelmed  with  calamities."  The  references 
are  omitted  to  save  space.  In  this  great  work  of  Thayer's, 
which  is  based  upon  Grimm's,  the  following  comment  is  found 
just  after  the  definition :  "In  the  New  Testament  it  [baptizo] 
is  used  particularly  of  the  rite  of  sacred  ablution,  first  instituted 
by  John  the  Baptist,  afterward  by  Christ's  command  received 
by  Christians  and  adjusted  to  the  contents  and  nature  of  their 
religion,  viz.,  an  immersion  in  water,  performed  as  a  sign  of  the 
removal  of  sin,"  etc. 

In  a  letter  recently  received  from  Prof.  Thayer,  in  response 
to  some  questions  propounded  to  him,  he  says : 

"As  to  the  meaning  of  baptizo,  to  which  your  subsequent 
questions  relate,  all  reputable  lexicographers  are  now  agreed 
that  its  primary  meaning  is  'to  immerse,'  etc. ;  see  Liddell  and 
Scott's  Greek  Lexicon,  7th  ed.  1883." 

The  lexicon  here  referred  to  defines  it  thus  :  1.  "To  dip  in 
or  under  water ;  of  ships,  to  sink  or  disable  them ;  to  be 
drenched  ;  over  head  and  ears  in  debt ;  drowned  with  questions 
or  getting  into  deep  water.  2.  To  draw  wine  by  dipping  the 
cup  into  the  bowl.  3.  To  baptize ;  Mid.  to  dip  oneself,  to  get 
oneself  baptized."  This  is  the  whole  of  the  definition.  Refer- 
ences are  omitted  to  save  space. 

In  1843  the  following  correspondence  took  place  between 
Dr.  Parmly,  of  New  York,  and  Prof.  Chas.  Anthon,  of  Columbia 
College : 

"No.  1  Bond  St.,  New  York,  March  23,  1843. 
"Professor  Charles  Anthon  : — In  conversation  with  Dr. 
Spring,  last  evening,  he  stated  that  in  the  original  the  word 
baptism,  which  we  find  in  the  New  Testament,  has  no  definite 


202 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPOST. 


or  distinct  meaning ;  that  it  means  to  immerse,  sprinkle,  pour, 
and  has  a  variety  of  other  meanings,  as  much  the  one  as  the 
other,  and  that  every  scholar  knows  it;  that  it  was  the  only 
word  that  could  have  been  selected  by  our  Savior,  having  such 
a  variety  as  to  suit  every  one's  views  and  purposes.  May  I 
ask  you  if  your  knowledge  of  the  language  from  which  the 
word  was  taken,  has  led  you  to  the  same  conclusion  ?  And  may 
I  beg  of  you  to  let  the  deep  interest  I  take  in  the  subject  plead 
my  apology  ? 

"I  have  the  honor  to  be,  with  great  respect,  most  respectfully 
yours,  E.  Parmly." 

PEOF.  anthon's  EESPONS'E  : 

"Columbia  College,  March  27,  1843. 
"Dr.  Parmly,  My  Dear  Sir  : — There  is  no  authority  what- 
ever for  the  singular  remark  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Spring,  relative  to 
the  force  of  haptizo.  The  primary  meaning  of  the  word  is  to 
dip  or  immerse,  and  its  secondary  meanings,  if  it  ever  had  any. 
all  refer  in  some  way  or  other,  to  the  same  leading  idea. 
Sprinkling,  etc.,  are  entirely  out  of  the  question.    Yours  truly, 

"Charles  Anthojst."-* 

Winer,  in  his  New  Testament  Grammar,  translated  by  Prof, 
Thayer,  in  explanation  of  the  fact  that  in  parallel  passages,  a 
preposition  is  "now  inserted  and  now  omitted,"  says  :  "This 
difference  in  phraseology  does  not  affect  the  sense,  but  each 
form  of  expression  arose  from  a  different  conception :  ^a5c7^e^7^  en 
sarJci,  means,  suffer  in  the  flesh  (body) ;  pascliein  sarici  means, 
suffer  according  to  (as  respects)  the  flesh.  Baptizein  en  Imdati^ 
signifies,  baptize  in  water  (immersing);  baptizein  liudati,  bap- 
tize with  water.  Here,  and  in  most  other  passages,  the  identity 
of  the  two  expressions  in  sense  is  manifest."  According  to  this 
distinguished  scholar  the  steady  and  uniform  sense  of  haptizo 

♦Campbell-Kiee  Debate,  pp.  171-2. 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  203 

is  immerse,  and  this  sense  is  not  affected  the  omission  of  the 
preposition.  This  is  true  because  haptizo  has  an  inherent 
meaning,  and  does  not  depend  on  a  preposition  for  its  meaning, 
although  the  use  of  a  preposition  may  render  the  inherent  mean- 
ing of  the  verb  more  perspicuous,  Winer's  grammar  is  quoted 
under  the  head  of  lexical  authority  on  account  of  the  eminently 
high  standing  of  its  author  as  a  scholar  and  critic. 

This  is  enough  to  indicate  the  trend  of  lexicography  as  to 
the  meaning  of  haptizo ;  and  when  to  this  is  added  the  remark 
of  Meyer,  the  great  German  commentator,  that  the  word  in  a 
given  place,  is  to  be  understood  "of  immersion,  which  the  word 
in  classic  Greek  and  in  the  New  Testament  everywhere 
denotes,"  the  question  appears  to  be  closed. 

CIBCUMSTANTIAL  EVIDENCE. 

Having  ascertained  what  the  word  in  question  meant  in  the 
time  of  Christ  and  the  apostles,  as  commonly  used  by  the 
people  who  were  acquainted  with  the  Greek  language,  we  next 
proceed  to  examine  the  circumstances  attending  the  administra- 
tion of  baptism  as  detailed  in  the  New  Testament.  For  our 
guidance  in  this  department  of  the  investigation,  we  have  this 
rule  of  interpretation  as  laid  down  by  Bishop  Horne;  "The 
received  signification  of  a  word  is  to  be  retained,  unless  weighty 
and  necessary  reasons  require  that  it  should  be  abandoned  or 
neglected."  Sir  William  Blackstone  says :  "  The  words  of  a 
law  are  generally  to  be  understood  in  their  usual  and  most 
known  signification,  not  so  much  regarding  the  propriety  of 
grammar,  as  their  general  and  popular  use." 

According  to  these  self-evident  rules  of  interpretation,  if  the 
circumstances  attending  the  use  of  haptizo  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment will  allow  the  word  to  be  taken  in  its  "  usual  and  most 
known  signification  "  as  used  at  that  time,  it  must  be  so  taken. 
Let  us  now  attend  to  these  circumstances. 

"  Then  went  out  unto  him  (John)  Jerusalem,  and  all  Judea, 


20i 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AXD  IMPORT. 


and  all  the  region  ronnd  about  Jordan ;  and  they  were  baptized 
of  him  in  the  river  Jordan,  confessing  their  sins."  Matt.  3 :  5, 
G,  and  Mark  1 :  5. 

"And  it  came  to  pass  in  those  days  that  Jesus  came  from 
Jfazareth  of  Galilee,  and  was  baptized  of  John  in  {eis,  into)  the 
Jordan.  And  straightway  coming  up  out  of  the  water,"  etc. 
Mark  1 :  9,  10. 

"And  John  also  was  baptizing  in  JEnon  near  to  Salim, 
because  there  was  much  water  there ;  and  they  came,  and  were 
baptized."    John  3  :  23. 

"And  he  commanded  the  chariot  to  stand  still;  and  they  both 
went  down  into  the  water,  both  Philip  and  the  eunuch ;  and  he 
baptized  him.  And  when  they  came  up  out  of  the  water,"  etc. 
Ac'ts  8  :  38,  39. 

Will  the  circumstances  here  exhibited  allow  the  word  "bap- 
tize "  to  retain  its  received  signification  ?  We  see  (1)  that  the 
people  went  to  a  river,  and  to  "much  water"  to  be  baptized; 
(2)  that  they  went  down  into  the  water  to  be  baptized ;  (3)  they 
were  baptized  in  water  and  in  a  river ;  (4)  they  came  up  out  of 
the  water  after  baptism.  These  circumstances  not  only  allow 
the  word  to  be  taken  in  its  "  ordinary  and  natural  significa- 
tion," but  they  require  it,  and  in  its  absence  are  utterly  mean- 
ingless. 

In  this  connection  it  is  proper  to  notice  particularly  the 
strong  expression  used  by  Mark  as  regards  our  Savior's  bap- 
tism. "  He  was  baptized  of  him,  eis,  into  the  Jordan."  "With 
this,  compare  example  10  in  the  foregoing  list :  "  Then  bravely 
baptizing  himself,  eis,  into  the  lake,"  etc.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  as  to  what  was  done  in  this  case.  But  the  form  of 
expression  in  regard  to  Christ  is  precisely  the  same,  only  the 
verb  is  in  the  passive  form.  If  Agamemnon,  when  he  baptized 
himself  into  the  lake,  plunged  himself  into  it,  the  Savior,  when 
he  was  baptized  by  John  into  the  river,  was  plunged  into  it. 
Dr.  Bloomfield  sees  the  force  of  this,  and  translates  the  expres- 
sion thus:    "Was  dipped,  or  plunged  into."    This  is  the 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  205 

thought  of  the  expression,  according  to  all  the  recognized 
canons  of  interpretation. 

EVIDENCE  FROM  HISTORY. 

A  glance  at  the  results  of  historical  research  along  this  line 
will  close  this  branch  of  our  investigation. 

Mosheim :  "  The  sacrament  of  baptism  was  administered  in 
this  century  (the  first)  without  the  public  assemblies,  in  places 
appointed  and  prepared  for  that  purpose,  and  was  performed  by 
an  immersion  of  the  whole  body  in  the  baptismal  font." 
Church  History,  Vol.  1,  p.  46. 

Neander :  "  The  usual  form  of  submersion  at  baptism, 
practiced  by  Jews,  was  passed  over  to  the  G-entile  Christians. 
Indeed,  this  form  was  the  most  suitable  to  signify  that  which 
Christ  intended  to  render  an  object  of  contemplation  by  such  a 
symbol ;  the  immersion  of  the  whole  man  in  the  spirit  of  a  new 
life."    Planting  and  Training  of  the  Christian  Church,  p.  161. 

Schaff :  "  The  usual  form  of  the  act  was  immersion,  as  is 
plain  from  the  original  meaning  of  the  Greek  baptizein  and 
haptismos;  from  the  analogy  of  John's  baptism  in  the  Jordan ; 
from  the  Apostles'  comparison  of  the  sacred  rite  with  the  mirac- 
ulous passage  of  the  Red  Sea,  with  the  escape  of  the  ark  from 
the  flood,  with  a  cleansing  and  refreshing  bath,  and  with  burial 
and  resurrection;  finally,  from  the  custom  of  the  ancient  church, 
which  prevails  in  the  East  to  this  day."  History  of  the  Chris- 
tian Church,  Vol.  1,  p.  123. 

Conybeare  and  Howson :  "  It  is  needless  to  add  that  bap- 
tism was  (unless  in  exceptional  cases)  administered  by  immer- 
sion, the  convert  being  plunged  beneath  the  surface  of  the 
water  to  represent  his  death  to  the  life  of  sin,  and  then  raised 
from  this  momentary  burial  to  represent  his  resurrection  to  the 
life  of  righteousness.  It  must  be  a  subject  of  regret  that  the 
general  discontinuance  of  this  original  form  of  baptism  (though 
perhaps  necessary  in  our  northern  climates)  has  rendered 


206  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  ASD  IMPOliT. 

obscure  to  popular  apprehension  some  very  important  passages 
of  Scripture."'    Life  and  Epistles  of  St.  Paul,  Vol.  1,  p.  439. 

Wall :  "  Tlieir  general  and  ordinary  way  was  to  baptize  by 
immersion,  or  dipping  the  person,  whether  it  were  an  infant,  or 
grown  man  or  woman,  into  the  water.  This  is  so  plain  by  an 
infinite  number  of  passages  that,  as  one  cannot  but  pity  the 
weak  endeavors  of  such  pjedobaptists  as  would  maintain  the 
negative  of  it,  so  also  we  ought  to  disown  and  show  a  dislike  of 
the  profane  scoffs  which  some  people  give  to  the  English  anti- 
pjedobaptists  merely  for  their  use  of  dipping.  It  is  one  thing 
to  maintain  that  that  circumstance  is  not  absolutely  necessary 
to  the  essence  of  baptism,  and  another,  to  go  about  to  represent 
it  as  ridiculous  and  foolish,  or  as  shameful  and  indecent,  when 
it  was  in  all  probability  the  way  by  which  our  blessed  Savior, 
and  for  certain  was  the  most  usual  and  ordinary  way  by  which 
the  ancient  Christians  did  receive  their  baptism."  History  of 
Infant  Baptism,  Vol.  1,  p.  571. 

De  Pressense :  "  So  Jesus  descended  into  the  waters  of  the 
Jordan,  and  then  the  awful  sign  was  given.  If  for  ablutions  he 
substituted  immersion,  it  was  the  better  to  represent  the  gravity 
of  the  disease  which  was  to  be  healed.  Scarcely  is  he  plunged 
in  the  waters  of  the  stream,  when  a  glorious  vision  completes 
the  illumination  of  the  Baptist."    Life  of  Christ,  pp.  244,  250. 

Geikie :  "  Holy  and  pure  before  sinking  under  the  waters, 
he  must  yet  have  risen  from  them  with  the  light  of  a  higher 
glory  in  his  countenance.  Past  years  had  been  buried  in  the 
waters  of  Jordan."    Life  of  Christ,  pp.  413,  414. 

Edersheim :  "It  was  as  if  symbolically,  in  the  word  of  St. 
Peter  (1  Peter  3 :  21),  that  baptism  had  been  a  new  flood,  and 
he  Avho  now  emerged  from  it,  the  Xoah — or  rest  and  comfort- 
bringer — who  took  into  his  ark  the  dove^  bearing  the  olive 
branch,  indicative  of  a  new  life.  Here,  at  these  waters,  was  the 
kingdom,  into  which  Jesus  had  entered  in  the  fulfillment  of  all 
righteousness ;  and  from  them  he  emerged  as  its  heaveu-desig- 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  207 

nated,  heaven-qualified,  and  heaven-proclaimed  king."  Life  of 
Christ,  vol.  1 ;  p.  284. 

Weiss  :  "  After  confessing  their  sins,  they  went  down,  man 
"by  man,  into  the  waters  of  Jordan,  in  order  to  emerge  new  born, 
a  people  prepared  for  the  Lord.  The  people  were  to  seal  their 
repentance  by  immersion  in  the  Jordan.  Jewish  ablutions 
arrived  at  a  ceremonial  purity  in  the  Levitical  sense,  and  had 
nothing  in  common  with  the  figurative  act  which  portrayed 
through  immersion  the  complete  disappearance  of  the  old 
nature,  and  by  the  emerging  again  the  beginning  of  a  totally 
new  life."    Life  of  Christ,  vol.  1 ;  pp.  307,  313. 

Ewald  :  "Every  member  of  the  nation  must,  with  all  sin- 
cerity, confess  his  sins  before  him  who  called  him  to  repentance, 
and  promise  a  new  and  better  life ;  then,  at  the  hand  of  him 
whose  it  was  to  make  this  sacred  promise  in  God's  stead,  be 
immersed  in  the  depths  of  the  water,  rise  purified  from  the  stain 
of  his  deeply  repented  sins  to  the  new  life  which  had  already 
been  explained  to  him  in  its  meaning  and  duties.  The  immer- 
sion in  the  depths  of  the  flowing  waters,  under  the  Baptist's 
hand,  became  the  strong,  visible  and  sensible  token  of  the  life- 
cleansing  and  spiritual  regeneration  of  the  race."  Life  of 
Christ,  p.  34. 

Beyschlag :  "  In  order  to  make  this  fundamental  thought  of 
his  preaching  still  more  evident  and  impressive,  John  created 
that  symbolic  rite  to  which  he  owes  his  name  in  the  world's 
history.  Those  who  with  penitent  spirit  confessed  their  sins, 
promised  reformation  and  accepted  his  teaching,  he  dipped  into 
the  floods  of  Jordan  as  a  sign  and  pledge  that  thus  their  old 
Adam  should  be  buried  in  the  purifying  flood,  and  a  new-born 
man  come  forth.  .  .  .  Copied  after  the  old  Levitical  wash- 
ings, the  baptism  of  John  was  still  something  new  and  peculiar, 
as  it  significantly  diSered  from  them  because  the  immersion 
was  entire,  and  performed  but  once."    Life  of  Christ,  p.  100. 

E-iggenbach :    "  John  extends  ablution  to  complete  immer- 


208  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 

sion  ;  that  is  really  baptism,  dipping  in  deep."  Life  of  Christ, 
p.  230. 

Grimm:  "John  thinks:  "Whatever  feelings  and  memories 
my  baptism  may  awaken,  it  remains  a  water-baptism,  a  mere 
dipping  in  water,  without  immediate  effect  upon  your  sins  ;  it  is 
only  a  preparation  for  the  remission  of  your  sins."  Life  of 
Christ,  vol.  2,  p.  114. 

All  the  foregoing  quotations  from  Lives  of  Christ,  are  taken 
from  a  work  compiled  and  recently  published  by  W.  W.  Everts, 
Jr.,  of  Haverhill,  Mass.  If  it  be  borne  in  mind  that  all  the 
eminent  writers  quoted  in  the  treatise  are  pedo-baptist  authors 
who  believe  that  baptism  may  be  received  by  affusion,  their 
testimony  almost  amounts  to  a  demonstration  that  John  prac- 
ticed immersion,  and  that  nothing  else  was  recognized,  as  bap- 
tism in  the  apostolic  age. 

It  is  but  fair  to  say  that  some  of  these  writers  express  the 
opinion  that  owing  to  various  extraordinary  circumstances, 
affusion  was  practiced  in  exceptional  cases  at  an  early  day. 
Dr.  Wall  may  speak  for  these  : 

"  On  the  other  side,  the  anti-pedobaptists  will  be  as  unfair 
in  their  turn,  if  they  do  not  grant  that  in  the  case  of  sickness? 
weakliness,  haste,  want  of  quantity  of  water,  or  such  like 
extraordinary  occasions,  baptism  by  affusion  of  water  on  the 
face  was  by  the  ancients  counted  sufficient  baptism.  I  shall, 
out  of  the  many  proofs  of  it,  produce  two  or  three  of  the  most 
ancient.  Anno  Dom.,  251,  Novatian  was  by  one  party  of  the 
clergy  and  people  of  Rome  chosen  bishop  of  that  church,"  etc. 
Dr.  Wall  then  goes  on  to  relate  the  circumstances  of  the  con- 
version of  Novatian  in  a  spell  of  sickness,  and  of  his  being 
"baptized  by  affusion  in  the  bed  as  he  lay."  This  is  presented 
as  the  most  ancient  case  of  "baptism  by  affusion"  on  record. 
But  as  it  occurred  about  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  it 
lacks  the  sanction  of  Christ  and  the  apostles. 

The  foregoing  examination  of  the  subject  seems  to  establish 
the  following  propositions : 


JJAFTIS3I—ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  209 

1.  When  the  New  Testament  was  written  the  word  baptize 
was  generally  understood  to  mean  immerse  ;  and  as  the  inspired 
writers  give  no  intimation  that  they  used  it  in  an  unusual  sense, 
it  must  have  its  "  ordinary  and  natural  signification "  when 
found  in  the  sacred  volume. 

2.  The  best  modern  lexicography  sustains  immerse  as  the 
proper  meaning  of  the  word  as  used  in  the  New  Testament,  and 
declares  that  there  is  no  evidence  that  Luke  and  Paul  and  the 
other  sacred  writers  put  upon  the  word  a  different  meaning. 

3.  The  circumstances  attending  the  administration  of  bap- 
tism as  recorded  in  the  Scriptures  unmistakably  point  to 
immersion. 

4.  The  allusions  to  baptism  in  the  Scriptures  clearly  indi- 
cate immersion. 

5.  The  concurrent  testimony  of  history  declares  immersion 
to  have  been  the  practice  of  the  apostles. 

//.    ITS  SUBJECTS. 

Baptism  is  a  divine  institution  belonging  to  the  New  Cove- 
nant, and  therefore  one  who  desires  to  know  who  its  proper  sub- 
jects are,  must  consult  the  Scriptures  of  the  New  Testament. 
The  theory  that  baptism  is  a  substitute  for  circumcision,  which 
was  strenuously  insisted  upon  a  few  years  ago  by  advocates  of 
infant  baptism,  is  now  practically  given  up.  If  any  particular 
class  of  people  are  to  be  baptized,  it  is  because  it  is  so  taught 
in  the  New  Testament.  The  only  divine  warrant  that  we  have 
for  administering  baptism  now,  is  contained  in  the  Great  Com- 
mission promulgated  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  after  his  resur- 
rection. If  any  one  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Christ,  it  is 
because  such  a  one  is  included  among  those  upon  whom  bap- 
tism is  enjoined  in  this  commission.  A  careful  and  candid 
investigation  of  the  commission  ought  to  leave  no  doubt  in  the 
inquiring  mind,  as  to  who  may,  or  may  not,  be  baptized.  To 
suppose  that  Jesus  Christ  gave  a  commission  so  ambiguous 

14 


210  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPOIiT. 


that  it  places  as  important  a  matter  as  the  proper  subjects  of 
baptism,  in  doubt,  is  to  impeach  either  his  wisdom  or  his  good- 
ness. Let  us,  therefore,  look  into  this  commission  in  the  love 
and  fear  of  God. 

"And  Jesus  came  to  them  and  spake  unto  them  saying,  All 
authority  hath  been  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and  on  earth.  Go 
ye  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  the  nations,  baptizing 
■them  into  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the 
Holy  Spirit :  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I 
commanded  you  and  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the  end 
of  the  world."    Matt.  28:  18-20,  R.  V. 

"And  he  said  unto  them,  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and 
preach  the  gospel  to  the  whole  creation.  He  that  believeth  and 
is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  disbelieveth  shall  be 
condemned."    Mark  16: 15,  16,  R.  Y. 

These  statements  contain  the  commission  in  all  its  essential 
elements.  Now,  what  limitations,  if  any,  does  this  language 
put  upon  baptism  as  to  its  subjects  ?  Is  national  baptism  con- 
temjjlated  here  ?  Is  it  implied  that  nations  as  such  are  to  be 
baptized?  Let  the  reader  carefully  scan  the  following  speci- 
mens of  reasoning :  Nations  are  to  be  baptized  ;  infants  are  of 
nations  ;  therefore  infants  are  to  be  baptized.  Nations  are  to  be 
baptized ;  idiots  are  of  nations  ;  therefore  idiots  are  to  be  bap- 
tized !  Nations  are  to  be  baptized ;  infidels  are  of  nations ; 
therefore  infidels  are  to  be  baptized !  Are  these  syllogisms 
sound  ?  If  so,  there  are  no  limitations  upon  baptism  and  any 
human  being  may  be  baptized  merely  on  account  of  relation- 
ship to  a  nation,  regardless  of  moral  or  spiritual  qualifications ! 
It  is  manifest  that  the  specimens  of  reasoning  presented  above 
are  logically  vicious,  and  a  little  examination  reveals  the  fact 
that  the  major  premise  in  every  case  contains  a  fallacy.  It 
assumes  that  nations  as  such  are  to  be  baptized.  If  this  be 
granted,  the  conclusions  are  unavoidable.  If  the  commission 
means  national  baptism,  it  means  infant  baptism ;  and  if  it 
means  infant  baptism,  it  means  idiot  baptism  !  and  if  it  means 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  211 


idiot  baptism,  it  means  infidel  baptism  !  This  reduction  shows 
that  the  baptism  of  the  commission  is  not  national  baptism, 
and  that  we  must  look  for  limitations. 

Matthew's  version  of  the  commission  says,  "Baptizing 
them."  Now  if  we  can  find  the  proper  antecedent  to  the  pro- 
noun "  them,"  that  will  give  great  aid  in  solving  the  question 
before  us.  It  is  already  manifest  that  "nations"  is  not  the 
proper  antecedent,  and  this  conclusion  receives  additional 
strength  from  the  general  principle  in  grammar  that  a  pronoun 
agrees  with  its  antecedent  in  gender.  This  is  not  always  the 
case  in  Greek,  but  this  is  the  general  rule,  and  is  not  dejjarted 
from  unless  for  obvious  reasons.  Applying  this  rule  to  the  pro- 
noun "them"  in  the  commission,  we  discover  that  its  antecedent 
cannot  be  "nations,"  for  that  word  {etlmee)  is  neuter,  and  the 
pronoun  {autous)  is  masculine.  The  true  antecedent  is  implied 
in  the  verb  (jnatheeteusate),  and  is  expressed  in  the  Revised 
Version,  "Make  disciples  of  all  nations,  baptizing  tliem''^  (the 
disciples).  This  haimonizes  the  grammar  of  the  passage,  and 
shows  that  no  one  is  to  be  baptized  simply  on  account  of 
belonging  to  a  nation.  It  shows  also  that  such  as  are  baptized 
under  the  commission  are  baptized  as  disciples  of  the  Lord. 
This  is  in  complete  harmony  with  the  statement  that  "Jesus 
was  making  and  baptizing  more  disciples  than  John." 

To  what  extent  one  must  be  a  disciple  to  be  entitled  to 
baptism  is  made  plain  by  Mark's  version  of  the  commission: 
"He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized."  From  this  it  is  clear  that 
baptism  is  limited  in  the  commission  by  faith,  and  confined  to 
believers.  The  verb  used  in  Matthew  {matlieeteuo)  embraces  the 
notion  of  imparting  and  receiving  instruction,  and  is  not  ajjpli- 
cable  to  such  as  are  incapable  of  being  taught.  Prof.  Thayer 
defines  the  word  thus :  "  To  make  a  disciple,  to  teach,  to 
instruct."  Sophocles :  "  To  make  a  disciple  of,  to  instruct." 
Cremer :  "  To  instruct  any  one,  to  teach,  to  make  any  one  a 
disciple."  This  verb  occurs  but  three  times  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, aside  from  the  commission  by  Matthew,  and  in  every 


212  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 


case  the  idea  of  instruction  is  present.  The  cognate  noun 
(matheetees)  occurs  about  two  hundred  and  forty  times,  and  in 
no  instance  is  it  applied  to  one  incapable  of  receiving  instruc- 
tion. Meyer,  a  prince  among  modern  critics  and  commentators, 
in  his  notes  on  the  commission  in  Matthew,  says :  "  Observe 
how  here  every  one  who  becomes  a  believer  is  conceived  of  as 
standing  to  Christ  in  the  personal  relation  of  a  matheetees y 

Commenting  on  didaskorites  autous,  the  same  author  says : 
"Intimating  that  a  certain  ethical  teaching  must  necessarily 
accompany  in  every  case  the  administration  of  baptism:  while 
ye  teach  to  observe  everything,  etc.  This  moral  instruction 
must  not  be  omitted  when  you  baptize,  but  it  must  be  regarded 
as  an  essential  part  of  the  ordinance.  That  being  the  case, 
infant  baptism  cannot  possibly  have  been  contemplated  in 
haptizontes,  nor,  of  course,  in  panta  fa  etJmee,  either."  Coming 
from  such  a  source,  this  exegesis  is  certainly  very  weighty. 

Seeing  that  the  commission,  in  itself  considered,  limits  bap- 
tism to  believers,  let  us  advance  to  the  next  point  of  view.  How 
did  the  apostles  understand  the  matter?  The  answer  to  this 
question  may  be  deduced  from  the  following  Scriptures  : 

"And  with  many  other  words  he  testified,  and  exhorted 
them,  saying.  Save  yourselves  from  this  crooked  generation. 
They  then  that  received  his  word  were  baptized ;  and  there  were 
added  unto  them  in  that  day  about  three  thousand  souls." 
Acts  2  :  40,  41. 

"But  many  of  them  that  heard  the  word  believed;  and  the 
number  of  the  men  came  to  be  about  five  thousand."    Acts  4:  4. 

"  But  of  the  rest  durst  no  man  join  himself  to  them  :  howbeit 
the  people  magnified  them,  and  believers  were  the  more  added 
to  the  Lord,  multitudes  both  of  men  and  women."  Acts  5 :  13, 
14. 

"  But  when  they  believed  Philip  preaching  good  tidings 
concerning  the  kingdom  of  God  and  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ, 
they  were  baptized  both  men  and  women."    Acts  8  :  12. 

"And  Crispus,  the  ruler  of  the  synagogue,  believed  in  the 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  ,213 

Lord  with  all  his  house ;  and  many  of  the  Corinthians  hearing 
believed,  and  were  baptized."    Acts  18 :  8. 

The  first  of  the  foregoing  passages  gives  an  account  of  the 
first  baptisms  that  took  place  under  the  commission,  just  after 
the  apostles  had  received  the  Holy  Spirit  who  was  to  guide 
them  into  the  whole  truth.  Carrying  out  their  commission, 
those  inspired  men  limited  baptism  to  them  that  "received 
their  word."  Soon  after  Pentecost,  the  number  of  the  disciples 
was  increased  to  five  thousand,  and  of  the  additional  two  thou- 
sand it  is  said  in  the  second  of  the  above  passages,  that  they 
"  heard  the  word  and  believed."  A  few  days  later,  multitudes 
were  added  to  the  Lord,  of  whom  it  is  said  in  the  third  passage 
that  they  were  believers,  and  they  are  classified  as  "  men  and 
women."  The  fourth  passage  states  that  those  who  were  bap- 
tized in  Samaria  were  people  who  believed  what  Philip 
preached,  and  they  are  classified  as  "men  and  women."  The 
fifth  passage  informs  us  that  in  Corinth  the  subjects  of  baptism 
were  such  as  heard  and  believed.  The  fair  inference  from  all 
this  is  that  the  apostles  understood  the  commission  to  limit 
baptism  to  believers.  If  they  had  baptized  others,  or  authorized 
others  to  be  baptized,  there  surely  would  be  some  record  of  it  in 
the  sacred  volume. 


It  is  deemed  almost  superfluous  to  even  allude  to  the 
assumption  that  the  baptism  of  households  implies  the  baptism 
of  infants  in  apostolic  times.  However,  as  some  might  consider 
the  argument  incomplete  without  some  reference  to  that  matter, 
it  shall  receive  attention.  Let  it  be  remembered  that  we  are 
now  in  the  realm  of  inference,  and  we  should  have  a  clear 
understanding  as  to  when  an  inference  is  legitimate.  The  fol- 
lowing rules  will  furnish  the  necessary  safeguard  at  this  point : 

"I  would  not  be  thought  wholly  to  reject  a  plain  and  evi- 
dent consequence  from  Scripture,  but  yet  I  will  never  admit  of  a 


214  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 


mere  consequence  to  prove  an  institution,  which  must  be  deliv- 
ered in  plain  terms,  as  all  laws  ought  to  be ;  and  where  I  have 
no  other  proof  but  some  Scripture  consequences,  I  shall  not 
think  it  equivalent  to  a  Scripture  proof.  If  the  consequence  be 
plain  and  obvious,  and  such  as  every  man  sees,  I  shall  not 
question  it;  but  remote,  and  dubious,  and  disputed  conse- 
quences, if  we  have  no  better  evidence,  to  be  sure  are  a  verj  ill 
foundation  for  articles  of  faith."  Dr.  Sherlock,  as  quoted  in 
Booth's  Pedo-baptism  Examined,  Vol.  3,  p.  104. 

Dr.  Sherlock's  position  respecting  consequences  or  infer- 
ences, as  applied  to  religious  ordinances,  is  impregnable,  and 
the  principle  he  enunciates  must  be  observed  in  order  to  protect 
the  church  againt  doctrines  and  commandments  of  men.  Now 
is  there  anything  in  the  fact  that  households  were  baptized  in 
the  days  of  the  apostles  to  yield  an  inference  that  is  "plain 
and  obvious,  and  such  as  every  man  sees,"  that  infants  were 
baptized?  Putting  the  matter  in  logical  shape  we  have  this 
result :  Every  household  embraces  an  infant ;  households  were 
baptized ;  therefore,  infants  were  baptized.  Before  the  inference, 
that  an  apostle  baptized  infants,  can  be  drawn  from  the  fact 
that  an  apostle  baptized  households,  the  major  premise  of  the 
foregoing  syllogism  must  be  established.  But  that  premise  is 
manifestly  false  and  absui'd,  and  hence  the  said  inference  is  not 
deducible  from  the  fact  in  hand. 

Dr.  Neander,  a  distinguished  ecclesiastical  historian  of  Ger- 
many, says :  "  We  cannot  infer  the  existence  of  infant  baptism 
from  the  instance  of  the  baptism  of  whole  families,  for  the  pas- 
sage in  1  Cor.  16  :  15,  shows  the  fallacy  of  such  a  conclusion,  as 
from  that  it  appears  that  the  whole  family  of  Stephanas,  who 
were  baptized  by  Paul,  consisted  of  adults.  That  not  till  so 
late  a  period  as  (at  least  certainly  not  earlier  than)  Irenaeus,  a 
trace  of  infant  baptism  appears,  and  that  it  first  became  recog- 
nized as  an  apostolic  tradition  in  the  course  of  the  third  century, 
is  evidence  rather  against  than  for  the  admission  of  its  apos- 
tolic origin."    Planting  and  Training,  pp.  161-2. 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  215 

Infant  "baptism  derives  no  support  from  household  baptism, 
prominent  and  learned  Pedo-baptists,  such  as  Neander,  being 
judges.  But  let  us  hear  further  from  distinguished  Pedo-bap- 
tists on  the  general  question  of  authority  for  infant  baptism. 
Dr.  A.  T.  Bledsoe,  late  editor  of  the  Southern  Review,  one  of  the 
most  learned  and  honored  members  of  the  Southern  Methodist 
Church,  in  a  discussion  with  one  of  his  own  brethren,  said : 

"Mr.  Miller  is  unduly  alarmed  at  our  honest  admission  that 
there  is  no  express  command  for  infant  baptism  in  the  New 
Testament.  He  seems  to  think,  indeed,  that  this  admission 
ruins  the  cause  of  infant  baptism.  If  so,  then  it  was  ruined  by 
Watson  and  Wesley  and  Knapp  and  Jacobi,  long  before  we 
ever  alluded  to  the  subject.  Nor  is  this  all,  for  almost  all 
writers  in  favor  of  infant  baptism  have  made  the  same  admis- 
sion."   Southern  Review  for  July,  1874. 

Dr.  Bloomfield  says :  "Commands,  or  plain  and  certain 
examples,  in  the  New  Testament  relative  to  it  I  do  not  find." 
Greek  Testament  with  English  Notes.    Vol.  1,  p.  153. 

Bishop  Burnet:  "There  is  no  express  precept  or  rule  given 
in  the  New  Testament  for  the  baptism  of  infants."  Exposition 
of  Thirt3^-nine  Articles. 

Dr.  Wall :  "Among  all  the  persons  that  are  recorded  as 
baptized  by  the  apostles,  there  is  no  express  mention  of  any 
infant."    History  of  Infant  Baptism. 

Luther  :  "It  cannot  be  proved  by  the  sacred  Scriptures  that 
infant  baptism  was  instituted  by  Christ,  or  begun  by  the  first 
Christians  after  the  apostles." 

Vitringa:  "That  some  in  the  ancient  church  long  ago 
doubted,  and  that  others  now  doubt,  whether  infants  ought  to 
be  baptized,  proceeds  principally,  I  think,  from  hence.  It  is 
not  related  as  a  fact  in  the  Gospels,  and  in  the  acts  of  the  prim- 
itive church,  that  infants  were  baptized  by  Christ,  or  by  the 
apostles." 

Dr.  Freeman  :  "The  traditions  of  the  whole  Catholic  Church 
confirm  us  in  many  of  our  doctrines,  which,  though  they  may 


2!G  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 

be  gathered  out  of  Scripture,  are  not  laid  down  there  in  so  many 
words :  such  as  infant  baptism,  and  of  episcopal  authority  above 
presbyters." 

Bishop  Sanderson  :  "The  baptism  of  infants  and  the  sprink- 
ling of  water  in  baptism,  instead  of  immersing  the  whole  body, 
must  be  exterminated  from  the  church  according  to  their  prin- 
ciples ;  i.  e.  that  nothing  can  be  lawfully  performed,  much  less 
required,  in  the  affairs  of  religion,  which  is  not  either  com- 
manded in.  the  Scriptures,  or  at  least  recommended  by  a  lauda- 
ble example." 

Bishop  Stillingfleet :  "Whether  baptism  shall  be  adminis- 
tered to  infants  or  not,  is  not  set  down  in  express  words,  but 
left  to  be  gathered  from  analogy  and  consequences."'* 

Dr.  Friedrick  Schleiermacher :  "All  traces  of  infant  baptism 
which  one  will  find  in  the  New  Testament  must  first  be  put  into 
it." 

Prof.  A.  Hahn  :  "Neither  in  the  Scriptures,  nor  during  the 
first  hundred  and  fifty  years,  is  a  sure  example  of  infant  bap- 
tism to  be  found ;  and  we  must  concede  that  the  numerous 
opposers  of  it  cannot  be  contradicted  on  gospel  grounds." 

Dr.  J.  A.  Starck  :  "There  is  not  a  single  example  to  be 
found  in  the  New  Testament  where  infants  were  baptized.  .  . 
In  household  baptisms  there  was  always  reference  to  the  gospel 
as  having  been  received.  .  .  .  The  New  Testament  presents 
just  as  good  grounds  for  infant  communion. "f 

Meyer :  "Therefore  (4)  the  baptism  of  the  children  of  Chris- 
tians, of  which  no  trace  is  found  in  the  New  Testament,  is  not 
to  be  held  as  an  apostolic  ordinance,  as,  indeed,  it  encountered 
early  and  long  resistance ;  but  it  is  an  institution  of  the  church 
which  gradually  arose  in  post-apostolic  times  in  connection 
with  the  development  of  ecclesiastical  life  and  of  doctrinal  teach- 
ing, not  certainly  attested  before  Tertullian,  and  by  him  still 
decidedly  opposed,  and,  although  already  defended  by  Cyprian, 


[*The  quotations  not  credited  are  from  Booth's  Pedo-baptism  Examined.] 
[fXlie  last  three  quotations  are  from  Ford's  Studies  on  Uaptisni.J 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  217 

only  becoming  general  after  the  time  of  Augustine  in  virtue  of 
that  connection."    Commentary  on  Acts  16  :  15. 

Schalf-Herzog  :  "There  is  no  trace  of  infant  baptism  in  the 
New  Testament.  All  attempts  to  deduce  it  from  the  words  of 
the  institution,  or  from  such  passages  as  1  Cor.  1:  16,  must  be 
given  up  as  arbitrary."    Cyclopaedia,  vol.  1,  p.  200. 

The  authors  of  all  the  foregoing  extracts  represent  churches 
that  practice  infant  baptism,  and  fairly  represent  the  learning 
of  their  respective  churches.  According  to  their  united  testi- 
mony, there  is  neither  precept  nor  plain  example  in  the  New 
Testament  for  infant  baptism.  This  is  marvelously  strange  if 
Christ  ever  authorized,  or  the  apostles  ever  practiced  it.  The 
Schaff-Herzog  statement  that  "there  is  no  trace  of  infant  bap- 
tism in  the  New  Testament,"  certainly  ought  to  cause  all  those 
who  accept  the  dictum  that  "the  Bible,  and  the  Bible  alone,  con- 
tains the  religion  of  Protestants,"  to  seriously  consider  whether 
infant  baptism  is  not  of  men,  rather  than  from  God.  If  the 
New  Testament  contains  no  trace  of  it,  it  must  be  an  addition 
to  the  word  of  God,  and  therefore  without  divine  authority. 
And  when  it  is  remembered  that  there  is  no  certain  trace  of  it  in 
the  history  of  the  church  during  the  first  two  hundred  years  of 
the  Christian  era,  and  that  its  first  advocates  based  it  upon  tra- 
dition and  the  usage  of  the  church,  and  not  upon  precept  or 
example  of  Scripture,  the  conclusion  seems  to  be  inevitable  that 
it  is  of  human  origin. 

The  foregoing  investigation  seems  to  fully  warrant  the  fol- 
lowing conclusions : 

1.  The  language  employed  by  the  Savior  in  instituting 
baptism,  limits  the  ordinance  to  believers.  Christ  ordained 
that  faith  and  baptism  should  go  together,  and  "  what  God  has 
joined  together  let  not  man  put  asunder." 

2.  The  apostles  and  first  evangelists  baptized  none  but 
believers,  since  "  no  trace  of  infant  baptism  is  found  in  the  New 
Testament." 

3.  Many  Pedo-baptists  of  the  highest  authority  concede 


218  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 

that  there  is  neither  precept  nor  example  in  the  Scriptures  for 
the  baptism  of  infants. 

4.  There  is  no  express  mention  of  infant  baptism  in  the 
writings  of  Christian  men  for  two  Imndred  years  after  Christ. 

5.  Infant  baptism,  to  the  extent  that  it  prevails,  displaces 
the  baptism  of  believers  and  to  that  extent  makes  void  a  com- 
mandment of  God  by  a  tradition  of  men. 

ti.  It  deprives  those  upon  whom  it  is  imposed,  of  the  blessed 
privilege  of  obeying  the  Lord  for  themselves,  and  takes  away 
the  opportunity  of  inquiring  after  God  in  this  divine  institution. 

ITS  IMPOST. 

"Wo  man  can  prove  from  the  Bible  that  baptism  has  no 
important  connection  with  salvation;  and  no  man  can  prove 
tliat  by  neglecting  it,  he  will  be  as  likely  to  obtain  the  divine 
favor  as  he  would  by  observing  it."  So  says  Dr.  Albert  Barnes, 
the  distinguished  Presbyterian  commentator  in  his  note  on  1 
Peter  3:  21. 

"  Baptism,  I  grant,  is  of  great  necessity,  and  though  I  dare 
fix  no  limits  to  the  infinite  goodness  and  mercy  of  God,  which  I 
am  confident  he  will  give  mighty  proofs  of,  in  great  instances 
of  kindness,  towards  all  sincere,  though  mistaken  men ;  how- 
ever, the  gospel  rule  is,  according  to  the  doctrine  of  the  apostle, 
to  repent  and  be  baptized  for  the  remission  of  sins.  We  should 
be  very  cautious,  therefore^  of  making  any  change  in  these 
things,  lest  we  deprive  ourselves,  through  our  presumption,  of 
that  title  to  pardon,  without  which  there  is  no  salvation."  This 
is  the  language  of  Dr.  Gale,  the  eminent  Baptist  who  reviewed 
Dr.  Wall  s  History  of  Infant  Baptism. 

Such  language  from  such  sources,  is  calculated  to  impress  a 
thoughtful  mind  with  the  idea  that  baptism  may  occupy  a  very 
important  place  in  the  economy  of  God's  grace. 

"  We  who  died  to  sin,  how  shall  we  any  longer  live  therein  ? 
Or,  are  ye  ignorant  that  all  we  who  were  baptized  into  Christ 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  219 

Jesus  were  baptized  into  his  death  ?  We  were  buried,  there- 
fore, with  him  through  baptism  into  death,  that  like  as  Christ 
was  raised  from  the  dead  through  the  glory  of  the  Father,  so 
we  also  might  walk  in  newness  of  life."    Rom.  6  :  2-4. 

"In  which  also  he  went  and  preached  unto  the  spirits  in 
prison,  which  aforetime  were  disobedient,  when  the  long-suffer- 
ing of  God  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark  was  a 
preparing,  wherein  few,  that  is,  eight  souls,  were  saved  through 
water ;  which  also  after  a  true  likeness  doth  now  save  you,  even 
baptism,  not  the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh,  but  the 
interrogation  (inquiry)  of  a  good  conscience  toward  God, 
through  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ."    1  Pet.  3:  19-21. 

These  words  of  inspiration  make  it  manifest  that  baptism 
does  occupy  an  important  place  in  the  divine  plan  of  redemp- 
tion, and  that  it  sustains  an  important  relation  to  the  salvation 
of  mankind.  To  discover  the  place  and  import  of  this  ordi- 
nance is  a  work  that  should  enlist  the  most  careful  and  candid 
investigation.  The  passages  of  Scripture  just  quoted,  as  well 
as  other  portions  of  the  word  of  God,  show  that  baptism  is  for 
those  alone  who  truly  believe  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  sincerely 
and  deeply  repent  of  sin,  and  have  a  well-fixed  purpose  of  heart 
to  devote  themselves  to  the  service  of  God.  It  belongs  to  that 
obedience  which  is  declared  to  proceed  "  from  the  heart,"  and  is 
wholly  without  value  when  dissociated  therefrom.  It  scriptur- 
ally  pertains  to  the  conscience  that  is  inquiring  after  God. 
Nowhere  in  the  New  Testament  is  baptism  viewed  as  standing 
alone,  or  as  having  a  place  independent  of  other  considerations. 
It  is  not  a  mere  external  rite  like  circumcision,  but  is  something 
that  relates  to  the  conscience,  and  on  the  human  side  derives  its 
importance  and  value  from  the  internal  condition  of  the  subject. 
There  can  be  no  scriptural  baptism  without  antecedent  faith 
and  repentance.  To  separate  this  ordinance  from  these  ante- 
cedents is  to  destroy  its  character  as  baptism,  take  away  its 
divine  beauty  and  significance,  and  reduce  it  to  the  level  of 


220  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 

ritualistic  formalism.  The  following  sentences  from  the  pen  of 
A.  Campbell  are  true  and  forceful : 

"  Baptism  is,  then,  designed  to  introduce  the  subject  of  it 
into  the  participation  of  the  blessings  of  the  death  and  resur- 
rection of  Christ,  who  'died  for  our  sins,'  and  'rose  again  for  our 
justification.'  But  it  has  no  abstract  efficacy.  Without  previ- 
ous faith  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  and  deep  and  unfeigned 
repentance  before  God,  neither  immersion  in  water,  nor  any- 
other  action,  can  secure  to  us  the  blessings  of  peace  and  pardon. 
It  can  merit  nothing.  Still  to  the  believing  penitent  it  is  the 
means  of  receiving  a  formal,  distinct,  and  specific  absolution  or 
release  from  guilt.  Therefore,  none  but  those  who  have  first 
believed  the  testimony  of  God  and  have  repented  of  their  sins, 
and  that  have  been  intelligently  immersed  into  his  death,  have 
the  full  and  explicit  testimony  of  God,  assuring  them  of  pardon. 
To  such  only  as  are  truly  penitent  dare  we  say,  '  Arise,  and  be 
baptized,  and  wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord,'  and  to  such  only  can  we  say  with  assurance,  '  You  are 
washed,  you  are  justified,  you  are  sanctified  in  the  name  of  the 
Lord  Jesus,  and  by  the  Spirit  of  God.'  "    Ch.  Sys.,  p.  58. 

This  extract  is  sufficient  to  bring  out  the  meaning  of  Mr. 
Campbell's  remark  (upon  which  partisan  and  unscrupulous 
controversialists  have  based  the  false  charge  of  "  baptismal 
regeneration,")  that  "  immersion  alone  was  the  act  of  turning 
to  God."  Mr.  Campbell's  writings  on  this  subject  clearly  show 
that  this  statement  has  reference  exclusively  to  believing  peni- 
tents, and  that  the  idea  of  its  author  was  that  immersion  is  the 
act  in  which  a  believing  penitent  turns  to  God.  The  notion 
that  any  one,  in  the  absence  of  faith  and  repentance,  can  turn 
to  God  in  immersion  or  any  other  act,  had  no  place  in  the  mind 
of  Mr.  C,  has  no  place  in  his  writings,  and  has  no  place  in  the 
teachings  of  the  Christian  Church.  Possibly  the  remark  is 
unfortunate  on  account  of  the  dishonest  use  that  has  been  and 
may  be,  made  of  it.  The  following  language  from  Mr.  C.  ought 
to  put  a  quietus  upon  this  matter : 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  221 

"  Our  opponents  contend  for  a  regeneration  begun  and  per- 
fected before  faith  or  baptism — a  spiritual  change  of  mind  by 
the  Holy  Spirit,  antecedent  to  either  knowledge,  faith,  or 
repentance,  of  which  infcints  are  as  susceptible  as  adults  ;  and, 
therefore,  as  we  contend,  make  the  gospel  of  no  effect.  By  way 
of  reprisals,  they  would  have  their  converts  think  that  we  go 
for  nothing  but  water,  and  sarcastically  call  us  the  advocates  of 
'water  regeneration,'  and  therefore  claim  the  title  of  orthodox. 
This  calumny  has  been  one  occasion  of  this  essay."  Ch.  Sys., 
p.  272. 

We  now  approach  the  important  question  of  relation  of  bap- 
tism to  the  remission  of  sins,  as  regards  the  "  alien  sinner." 
Remission  of  sins  is  a  blessing  to  be  enjoyed  under  the  cove- 
nant, testament,  or  will  of  Christ,  and  in  order  to  undei'stand 
the  subject  we  must  study  that  testament  or  will.  The  first 
point  of  inquiry  relates  to  the  time  when  this  will  was  set  up, 
and  went  into  elfect.  The  following  passage  throws  a  clear 
light  on  this  subject:  "  For  a  testament  is  of  force  where  there 
hath  been  death,  for  doth  it  ever  avail  while  he  that  made  it 
liveth  ? "  This  is  said  with  direct  reference  to  the  death  of 
Christ,  and  shows  plainly  that  his  will  or  testament  did  not  go 
into  effect  until  after  his  death.  Under  former  and  provisional 
covenants  there  were  provisional  arrangements  with  respect  to 
remission  of  sins ;  and  during  our  Savior's  personal  ministry  on 
earth,  he  had  authority  to  forgive  sins  on  any  condition,  or 
unconditionally,  as  seemed  to  him  proper.  A  man  of  wealth 
may  distribute  his  property  before  his  death,  as  he  may  see  fit 
to  do  ;  but  when  he  dies,  having  made  a  will,  the  heirs  must 
inherit  according  to  the  provisions  of  the  will.  It  is  so  as 
regards  Christ  and  his  will.  What  he  may  have  said  or  done 
before  he  made  his  will  and  left  this  word,  is  no  precedent  for 
those  who  are  living  now.  They  must  look  to  the  will  and 
enjoy  the  blessing  according  to  its  provisions.  This  will  we 
find  recorded  in  the  following  language  : 

"  And  he  said  unto  them.  Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and 


222  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMBORT. 

preach  the  gospel  to  the  whole  creation.  He  that  believeth  and 
is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  but  he  that  disbelieveth  shall  be 
condemned."    Mark  16  :  15,  16. 

If  this  were  a  legal  document  to  be  adjudicated  in  our  civil 
courts,  there  would  be  but  one  opinion  as  to  the  one  to  whom 
salvation  is  promised.  If  a  wealthy  man  should  die  and  leave 
a  will  distributing  his  property  among  his  townsmen  on  the 
following  basis,  He  that  can  read  and  write  shall  have  one 
thousand  dollars,  there  would  be  no  dispute  respecting  the  con- 
dition of  inheritance.  A  person  not  possessed  of  ability  to  both 
read  and  write,  would  not  think  of  setting  up  a  claim.  But  this 
would  be  no  plainer  than  is  the  language  of  the  Savior,  in 
which  he  promises  salvation  to  the  baptized  believer.  In  the 
former  case  the  courts — from  the  lowest  to  the  highest — would 
hold  that  the  will  promises  a  thousand  dollars  eacli  to  those  who 
can  both  read  and  write,  and  to  those  only.  "  He  that  can  read 
and  write  shall  have  a  thousand  dollars."  "He  that  believeth 
and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved."  The  latter  statement  is  as 
definite  and  explicit  as  the  former,  and  leaves  no  more  room  for 
doubt  as  to  its  meaning.  There  ought  to  be  no  dispute  about 
it.  That  faith  and  baptism  are  both  conditions  precedent  to 
pardon,  is  as  plain  as  it  is  possible  for  language  to  state  a 
thought. 

ITS  IMPORT. 

But  let  us  ascertain,  if  we  can,  how  the  inspired  apostles 
understood  this  matter.  Christ  put  his  will  into  their  hands 
and  made  it  their  duty,  as  his  executors,  to  carry  out  its  provis- 
ions, and  offer  pardon  to  the  people  according  to  its  terms, 
charging  them  not  to  begin  the  work  until  "  endued  with  power 
from  on  high,"  and  to  "begin  in  Jerusalem."  "We  find  that 
these  men,  according  to  the  instructions  they  received,  waited  in 
Jerusalem  until  they,  on  Pentecost,  received  the  "promise  of  the 
Father,"  and  were  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit.    Thus  endued 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  22o 

with,  wisdom  and  power  from  above  they,  for  the  first  time, 
opened  the  Lord's  will  before  the  people,  and  published  the 
terms  of  pardon  and  salvation  therein  laid  down.  The  first 
thing  they  did  was  to  establish  the  Lordship  of  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth, and  thus  convict  their  hearers  of  sin,  and  impress  upon 
them  the  necessity  of  appealing  for  salvation.  This  being  done 
the  appeal  came  from  convicted  hearts  in  this  earnest  query : 
" Brethren,  what  shall  we  do?"  This  question  had  reference,  of 
course,  to  salvation,  and  called  for  the  conditions  thereof  as  laid 
down  in  the  commission  under  which  the  apostles  were  acting. 
In  telling  these  convicted  inquirers  what  to  do  to  be  saved,  an 
inspired  apostle  said :  "Repent  ye,  and  be  baptized  every  one 
of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,  unto  the  remission  of  your 
sins  ;  and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  Here  we 
find  (a)  a  general  command  to  all  the  inquirers  to  repent,  the 
verb  being  imperative  and  plural;  (b)  a  special  command  to 
every  individual  penitent  to  be  baptized,  the  verb  being  impera- 
tive and  singular ;  (c)  these  things  were  to  be  done  in  the  name 
of  Jesus  Christ,  i.  e.,  in  recognition  of  his  Lordship;  (d)  they 
were  to  be  done  unto  or  for  the  remission  of  sins,  and  (e)  the 
gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  was  promised  to  those  who  might  repent, 
and  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  meaning  of 
Peter's  language  is  equally  plain  and  obvious  with  that  of 
Christ  in  the  commission  recorded  by  Mark.  The  language  is 
expanded  to  include  the  item  of  repentance  mentioned  by  Luke, 
but  not  especially  mentioned  by  Mark. 

We  find  here  an  order  of  sequence  that  is  interesting  and 
instructive,  and  very  helpful  to  him  who  would  know  what  the 
will  of  the  Lord  is.  This  is  so  clearly  and  lucidly  stated  by 
Prof.  J.  R.  Boise,  Ph.  D.,  LL.  D.,  of  the  Baptist  Union  Theolog- 
ical Seminary  at  Morgan  Park  (near  Chicago),  HI.,  in  a  letter  to 
the  writer,  that  it  gives  me  pleasure  to  insert  his  words  : 

"  In  Acts  2  :  38,  we  find  repentance,  baptism  in  faith,  (lead- 
ing) into  the  remission  of  sins.  'In  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ' 
can  only  mean  faith  in  him  ;  and  so  it  is  understood  by  all  the 


224  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 

best  commeatators.  Eis  apJiesin,  etc.,  belongs  with  the  two 
verbs  preceding.  We  have,  then,  repentance,  baptism  in  faith, 
the  remission  of  sins,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  all  in  regular 
sequence." 

The  exegesis  of  this  passage  simply  involves  a  plain  ques- 
tion of  grammar.  If  the  phrase  "unto  the  remission  of  sins  — 
eis  aphesin  liamartioii — is  to  be  connected  with  the  two  verbs 
preceding,  it  follows  with  the  clearness  of  light  itself,  that  bap- 
tism, to  a  penitent  believer,  is  for,  or  in  order  to,  the  remission 
of  sins.  On  this  point  I  wrote  to  Dr.  Albert  Barnes,  in  1870,  and 
received  the  following  response  : 

"My  knowledge  of  Greek  is  very  imperfect,  and  no  great 
value  should  be  attached  to  my  opinion  on  a  question  of  Greek 
criticism.  Bat  it  seems  to  me  that  the  word  eis  in  the  passage 
referred  to,  (Acts  2  :  38)  relates  to  the  entire  previous  sentence. 
Repent  and  be  baptized  every  one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ,  eis  unto  or  in  order  to,  or  with  reference  to,  the  remission 
of  sins,  etc.,  that  is,  the  repentance  and  baptism  both  have  ref- 
erence to  the  remission  of  sins ;  or  the  entire  process,  so  to 
speak,  in  the  divine  arrangement  for  the  remission  of  sins, 
embraces  this,  or  this  is  the  complete  process  aj^i^ointed  by  God 
in  connection  with  the  pardon  of  sin.  Whether  a  man  can  be 
saved  without  baptism  is  a  question  not  connected  with  the  exe- 
gesis of  the  passage ;  but  the  design  of  Peter,  as  I  understand  it, 
is  to  state  what  is  the  complete  divine  arrangement  in  order  to 
the  remission  of  sins.    (Comp.  Mark  16  :  16)." 

In  1876  Robert  T.  Matthews,  then  Professor  of  Latin  and 
Greek  in  Eminence  College,  Ky.,  addressed  the  following  note 
of  inquiry  to  the  Professors  of  Greek  in  several  leading  colleges 
and  universities  in  this  country  :  "Will  you  be  so  kind  as  to 
give  me  your  translation  of  the  preposition  eis  in  Acts  2 :  38, 
and  your  opinion,  as  a  Greek  scholar,  as  to  what  grammatical 
relation  exists  between  the  predicates  of  the  verse  and  the 
phrase  aphesin  tiamartionf   I  shall  be  obliged  for  your  answer 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 


225 


in  the  light  of  scholarship,  aside  from  all  theological  applica- 
tions of  the  verse." 

Responses  were  received  as  follows  : 

Prof.  Tyler,  of  Amherst  College,  Mass. : 

"  I  shall  translate  Acts  2  :  38  literally,  thus  :  Repent  and 
let  every  one  of  you  be  baptized  in  (or  on)  the  name  of  Jesus 
Christ  unto  remission  of  sins.  The  preposition  eis  seems  to 
denote  the  object  and  end  of  the  verbs  which  precede  in  the 
imperative.  In  other  words  remission  of  sins  is  the  object  and 
end  (or  result)  of  repentance  and  baptism.  The  meaning  may 
perhaps  be  more  definitely  expresse  1  thus:  Repent  ani  let 
every  one  of  you  be  baptized,  to  the  end  that  your  sins  may  be 
forgiven." 

Prof.  H.  C.  Cameron,  of  Princeton,  l^T.  J.: 

"  The  preposition  eis  in  Acts  2  :  38  is  evidently  used  in  its 
final  sense  ;  and  the  phrase  is  clearly  connected  with  metanoees- 
ate  kai  baptistheeto  (repent  and  be  baptized)  as  the  end  to 
which  repentance  and  baptism  in  the  name  of  Christ  led." 

Prof.  Packard,  of  Yale  College,  Conn. : 

"  Here  it  {eis)  seems  to  be  connected  with  both  verbs.  With 
baptizo  alone  it  has  a  special  New  Testament  use,  as  to  the 
meaning  of  which  scholars  are  somewhat  divided.  My  own 
impression  (to  give  it  for  what  it  is  worth)  is  that  I  should  trans- 
late it,  if  the  words  occurred  in  Plato,  to  the  end  of  remission  of 
sins.  It  would  then  make  aphesin  liamartion  an  object  aimed 
at,  or  a  result  attained  by,  the  acts  denoted  by  the  verbs." 

Prof.  Foster,  of  Colby  University,  Minn. : 

"Without  a  special  examination  of  the  passage  in  connec- 
tion with  others  in  which  like  expressions  occur,  I  should  say 
that  the  word  here  has  the  force  of  'unto,'  'in  order  to,'  'for  the 
sake  of,'  indicating  a  result  to  be  attained,  and  that  it  connects 
the  phrase  aphesin  liamartion  with  both  the  foregoing  impera- 
tive verbs,  alike  grammatically  considered,  though,  on  other 
grounds,  I  should  say  specially  with  the  first,  since  pardon  is 

15 


226 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  ASD  IMPOBT. 


nowhere  offered  on  condition  of  baptism  alone,  while  it  is  on 
that  of  repentance." 

Prof.  D'Ooge,  of  Ann  Arbor  University,  Mich.  : 

"In  my  judgment  the  preposition  eis,  in  the  verse  referred 
to,  expresses  the  relation  of  aim  or  end  in  view,  answering  the 
question  els  ti  (for  what  ?),  and  to  be  translated  by  'unto,'  'in 
order  to,'  'for.'  This  sense  of  eis,  as  you  doubtless  know,  is 
recognized  by  Liddell  and  Scott  for  classical ;  by  Winer  for  New 
Testament  usage." 

Prof.  Flagg,  of  Cornell  University,  N.  Y. : 

"In  answer  to  your  inquiry  about  the  force  of  the  preposi- 
tion, eis,  in  the  passage  of  the  New  Testament  to  which  you  refer 
(Acts  2 :  38),  I  should  say  that  it  denoted  intention  or  purpose, 
'with  a  view  to,'  much  as  if  it  had  been  written,  'so  as  to  obtain 
remission  of  sins.'  I  speak,  however,  wholly  from  the  stand- 
point of  classic  Greek,  not  being  familiar  with  the  changes 
introduced  by  the  Hellenistic.  As  to  any  theological  bearings 
that  the  subject  may  have,  I  am  wholly  indifferent." 

Prof.  Proctor,  of  Dartmouth  College,  N.  H. :  "I  am  inclined 
to  think  that  the  phrase,  'in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ,'  though 
grammatically  limiting  only  baptistheeto,  does  in  thought 
modify  the  connection  of  eis,  the  ideas  standing  logically  in  the 
following  order :  Having  been  shown  your  ill  behavior  against 
the  Messiah,  put  faith  in  (the  name  of)  Christ ;  and  on  the  basis 
of  that  faith,  repent  and  confess  (be  baptized),  and  then  be  for- 
given, eis  connecting  aphesis,  not  with  the  two  predicates  sepa- 
rately, but  with  the  whole  preceding  part  of  the  sentence." 

Prof.  Harkness,  of  Brown  University,  R.  I. :  "  In  my  opinion, 
in  Acts  2  :  38,  denotes  purpose,  and  may  be  rendered,  '  in 
order  to,'  or,  '  for  the  purpose  of  securing,'  or,  as  in  our  English 
version,  'for,'  Eis  aphesin  hamartion  suggests  the  motive  or 
object  contemplated  in  the  action  of  the  two  preceding  verbs." 

The  remarkable  unanimity  of  sentiment  that  runs  through 
the  utterances  of  all  these  learned  professors  cannot  fail  to 
impress  the  candid  mind  with  the  idea  that  the  opinion  they 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  227 

express  must  be  correct.  In  addition  to  tlie  foregoing,  let  care- 
ful attention  be  given  to  the  translation  and  interpretation  of 
this  passage,  as  set  forth  by  other  scholars  and  critics : 

Dr.  H.  B.  Hackett,  a  learned  Baptist  commentator,  in  his 
commentary  on  Acts,  translates  eis  aphesin  liamartion,  "in 
order  to  the  remission  of  sins,"  and  adds :  "  We  connect  nat- 
urally with  both  the  preceding  verbs.  This  clause  states  the 
motive  or  object  which  should  induce  them  to  repent  and  be 
baptized.  It  enforces  the  entire  exhortation,  not  one  part  of  it 
to  the  exclusion  of  the  other." 

Lange's  Commentary  :  "  This  apliesis  Tiamartion  is  unques- 
tionably connected  more  intimately  and  directly  than  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Ghost  with  the  baptismal  act ;  the  former  [apliesis'], 
namely,  is  indicated  by  the  word  eis  [for  the  remission,  etc.],  as 
the  immediate  purpose  of  baptism,  and  as  the  purpose  insepa- 
rably connected  with  it,"  etc. 

Meyer's  Commentary :  "  What  a  definite  and  complete 
answer  and  promise  of  salvation !  .  .  .  Eis  denotes  the 
object  of  the  baptism,  which  is  the  remission  of  the  guilt  con- 
tracted in  the  state  before  metanoia^^ — repentance. 

Philip  Schalf  says :  "  He  (Peter)  at  the  same  time  called 
upon  his  hearers  to  repent  and  be  baptized  in  the  name  of  Jesus, 
as  the  founder  and  head  of  the  heavenly  kingdom,  that  even 
they,  though  they  had  crucified  the  Lord  of  glory,  might  receive 
forgiveness  of  sins  and  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  whose  won- 
derful workings  they  saw  in  the  disciples."  History  of  the 
Christian  Church,  Vol.  1,  p.  61. 

It  is  needless  to  extend  this  list  of  authorities.  The  con- 
sensus of  scholarly  opinion  as  to  the  meaning  and  force  of  Acts 
2  :  '-^S  is  remarkable,  and  it  is  difficult  to  see  any  room  for 
doubt  as  to  the  connections  and  purpose  of  baptism  in  the 
Christian  religion.  But  perhaps  some  additional  light  may  be 
thrown  upon  the  subject  by  an  examination  of  a  few  collateral 
and  corroborative  passages. 


228  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 

"And  now  why  tarriest  thou?  arise,  and  be  baptized  and 
wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  on  his  name."    Acts  22  :  16. 

This  language  was  addressed  to  Saul  of  Tarsus  tliree  days 
after  his  interview  with  the  Lord  near  the  city  of  Damascus.  It 
is  language  that  was  spoken  to  a  believing  penitent  who  had 
spent  three  days  in  prayer  to  Christ.  That  he  was  not  a  par- 
doned man  when  Ananias  spoke  these  words  to  him  is  self-evi- 
dent, and  that  baptism  was  regarded  as  intimately  connected 
with  the  pardon  of  his  sins  is  plain.  Otherwise  the  language  is 
meaningless. 

Wesley's  note  on  this  passage  is  as  follows:  "Baptism, 
administered  to  real  penitents,  is  both  a  means  and  seal  of  par- 
don. Nor  did  God  ordinarily,  in  the  primitive  church,  bestow 
this  on  any,  unless  through  this  means." 

Doddridge  says  :  "  God  did  not  ordinarily  give  any  particu- 
lar person  any  public  and  visible  token  of  pardon  till  he  had 
submitted  to  baptism,  which  being  a  visible  token  of  favorable 
regard,  and  a  seal  of  pardon,  might  be  said  to  wash  away  sins." 

Meyer's  Commentary :  "  Here,  too,  baptism  is  that  by  means 
of  which  the  forgiveness  of  the  sins  committed  in  the  pre-Chris- 
tian life  takes  place." 

"In  which  (spirit)  also  he  went  and  preached  unto  the 
spirits  in  prison,  which  aforetime  were  disobedient,  when  the 
long-suffering  of  God  waited  in  the  days  of  Noah,  while  the  ark 
was  a  preparing,  wherein  few,  that  is,  eight  souls,  were  saved 
through  water ;  which  also  after  a  true  likeness  doth  now  save 
you,  even  baptism,  not  the  putting  away  of  the  filth  of  the  flesh, 
but  the  interrogation  of  a  good  conscience  toward  God,  through 
the  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ."    1  Peter  3  :  19-21. 

This  passage  is  without  meaning  in  the  absence  of  the  idea 
that  baptism  has  an  important  bearing  on  salvation.  Taken  in 
connection  with  the  passages  heretofore  examined,  it  certainly 
cannot  mean  1'^ss  than  baptism  is  a  condition  of  pardon. 

We  are  now  prepared  to  consider  this  question:  Is  baptism 
essential  to  salvation  ?    Perhaps  no  unqualified  answer  can  be 


BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT.  229 

given  to  this  question  with  safety,  and  the  same  might  be  said 
of  faith.  To  say  that  a  thing  is  essential  is  equivalent  to  say- 
ing there  can  be  no  salvation  without  that  thing.  This  no  one 
will  say  of  faith  in  Christ.  There  are  many  who  cannot  believe 
in  Christ  for  lack  of  ability,  such  as  infants  and  idiots ;  while 
many  others  do  not  believe  for  lack  of  the  means  of  faith.  No 
right-thinking  person  will  affirm  that  these  will  all  be  lost.  In 
view,  however,  of  the  plain  teaching  of  Scripture  it  is  safe  to 
say  that  baptism  is  essential  to  a  Scriptural  assurance  of  the 
pardon  of  sin,  and  acceptance  v/ith  God.  God  has  promised  to 
pardon  and  accept  him  who  "  believes  and  is  baptized,"  and  the 
divine  word  gives  full  assurance  of  pardon  to  all  those  who 
exercise  repentance  toward  God  and  faith  toward  our  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  and  lovingly  obey  the  Savior  in  baptism.  Nor  is 
this  at  all  in  conflict  with  what  the  Scriptures  say  about  justifi- 
cation by  faith.  On  the  contrary,  it  explains  what  is  meant 
when  the  word  of  God  predicates  justification  of  the  believer, 
and  shows  that  the  reference  is  always  to  an  obedient  believer, 
as  is  plain  from  the  following  passage  :  "  For  ye  are  all  sons  of 
God,  through  faith,  in  Christ  Jesus.  For  as  many  of  you  as 
were  baptized  into  Christ  did  put  on  Christ."  Gal.  3  :  26,  27. 
The  latter  of  these  statements  is  explanatory  of  the  former,  and 
clearly  shows  that  becoming  a  child  of  God  through  faith 
includes  putting  Christ  on  in  baptism.  On  this  passage  Meyer's 
Commentary  says:  "The  words  just  used,  Jiuioi  Tlieou  este, 
expressing  what  the  readers  as  a  body  are  through  faith  in 
Christ,  are  now  confirmed  by  the  mention  of  the  origin  of  this 
relation ;  and  the  ground  on  which  the  relation  is  based  is,  that 
Christ  is  the  Son  of  God,  liosoi  [corresponding  to  the  emphatic 
pantes  in  ver.  26,  eis  Christoii]  in  relation  to  Christ,  so  that  ye 
who  belong  to  Christ  through  baptism  become  partakers  in 
fellowship  of  life  with  him.  ...  Ye  have  appropriated  the 
same  peculiar  state  of  life,  that  is,  the  very  same  specific  rela- 
tion to  God,  in  wliich  Christ  stands ;  consequently,  as  he  is  the 
Son  of  God,  ye  have  likewise  entered  into  the  worship  of  God, 


230  BAPTISM— ITS  ACTION,  SUBJECTS  AND  IMPORT. 


namely  by  means  of  the  pneuma  liuiothesias  [spirit  of  adop- 
tion] received  at  baptism.  Observe,  besides,  how  baptism 
necessarily  presupposes  the  metanoia  (Acts  2 :  38)  and  faith. 
.  ,  .  It  is  true  that  Christians  are  the  sons  of  God  only  by 
adoption  {Imiotliesia);  but  just  by  means  of  this  new  relation 
entered  u]3on  in  baptism,  they  have  morally  and  legally  entered 
into  the  like  state  of  life  with  the  only  begotton  Son,  and  have 
become,  although  only  his  brethren  by  adoption,  still  his 
brethren." 

In  connection  with  the  foregoing,  let  the  reader  carefully 
study  John  3 :  5,  Titus  3  :  5,  and  Heb.  5  :  9,  which  reads  thus : 
"  And  having  been  made  perfect,  he  became  unto  all  them  that 
obey  him  the  author  of  eternal  salvation."  May  all  men  every- 
where be  led  by  the  spirit  of  implicit  and  trustful  obedience  to 
our  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Amen  ! 


D.  n.  DuNGAX  was  born  in  Noble  county,  Intl.,  May  15,  IS.'w,  Ills 
father,  James  Dungan,  moved  to  Clay  county,  same  State,  a  year  later, 
where  the  subject  ot  our  sketdi  grew  up  in  the  malaria  ot  that  counti-y  at 
that  time.  His  advantages  tor  an  education  were  such  as  tiie  country 
afforded.  The  public  schools  iiad  very  ordinary  teachers,  and  never  inore 
than  two  terms  a  year.  In  the  summer  of  1852,  the  family  journeyed  to  the 
Missouri  I'iver,  and  settled  in  Harrison  county,  tlie  land  being  not  yet  in 
market,  and  the  Indians  still  iuinting  and  trading  through  tiie  country. 
This  was  the  time  of  the  great  Mormon  emigration.  Hard  work  on  a  new 
farm  was  the  only  recreation  for  five  years. 

Educational  atlvantages  in  the  West  were  not  large  at  that  time,  but 
still  there  were  a  few  persons  from  the  East  that  wei-e  educated,  and  from 
these  the  young  man  )iad  much  help.  At  the  age  of  twenty-one  he  became  a 
Clu-istian,  and  a  year  later  began  to  preach.  This  was  the  beginning  of 
education  in  earnest.  He  was  married  in  February,  ]«G1,  to  Miss  M.  A. 
Kinnis,  of  Scotland,  and  in  the  following  jNIarch  began  to  labor  for  a  co-oper- 
ation, inchubng  a  few  counties  on  the  western  slope  of  Iowa  and  as  much  of 
the  territory  of  Nebraska  as  could  be  reached.  Ijetwcen  teaching  and 
preaching,  time  passed,  and  a  living  was  gained  till  the  winter  of  jsii  l-'r.o, 
when  he  began  to  work  tor  tlie  General  Missionary  Board.  He  was  liicn 
living  at  Plattsmoutii,  Neb.  Soon  after,  he  moved  to  Pawnee  City,  and  con- 
tinued in  tlie  missionary  work  till  1<S71,  when  he  Avas  released  on  his  own 
request  that  he  might  locate  in  the  city  of  Lincoln  as  the  pastor  ot  the  new 
church  that  was  then  being  organized  in  that  new  city.  In  1874  he  returned 
to  Iowa,  and  labored  tor  the  congregations  at  Oskaloosa,  Eldora,  ^It.  Picas 
ant,  Davenport,  and  University  I'iace  Church  at  Dcs  JNIoines.  During  the 
four  years  that  he  preaclied  for  the  latter  congregation,  it  increased  from  a 
membership  of  seventy  to  55o.  He  taught  in  the  Bible  department  of  Drake 
University  from  lH8.'J-'90  inclusive,  during  which  time  sixty  preachers  were 
prepared  for  tlie  ministry. 

^Ir.  Dungan  has  been  twice  honored  with  the  chaplaincy  of  the  Legisla- 
ture of  Nebraska,  and  was  a  member  of  the  first  Board  of  Regents  of  the 
State  University,  which  position  he  held  for  six  years.  He  made  the  collec- 
tion of  library  and  cabinet  for  that  institution.  He  was  the  candidate  for 
Governor  on  the  prohiijition  ticket  in  Iowa  in  1879,  and  it  is  believed  by 
Iowa  prohibitionists  that  this  campaign  was  the  real  cause  of  prohibition 
being  ado[)ted  in  that  State.  He  received  ot  Drake  University  tlie  degree  ot 
A.  M.  in  1884.  He  was  called  to  the  presidency  of  Cotner  University  at 
Bethany  Heights  near  Lincoln,  Neb.,  June  17,  1890.  It  is  supposed  that  be 
will  give  to  this  rising  and  prosperous  institution  the  rest  of  his  life.  The 
State  University  of  Nebraska,  by  a  unanimous  vote  of  both  Faculty  and 
Regents,  conferred  on  him  the  (legree  of  LL.D.  on  June  10,  1891.  He  is 
lield  in  high  esfceni  by  the  real  educators  of  the  country  for  his  Avide  scholar- 
ship and  practical  common  sense.  He  has  had  much  experience  as  a  presid- 
ing orticer,  having  served  six  years  as  president  of  the  Nebraska  Board  of 
JMissions,  nine  years  as  prcsicbnit  of  the  State  Convention  of  Iowa,  once  as 
president  of  the  General  JMi-isioiiary  Board,  and  is  believed  to  be  one  of  the 
best  parliamentarians  in  the  AV'est.  He  is  the  author  of  several  popular 
works,  as  "On  the  Kock,"  which  has  had  a  remarkable  sale,  "Modern 
Phases  of  Skepticism  ;  "  "  Hum,  iJuin  and  the  IJemedy ;  "  "  Hermeneutics ;,  " 
"Chang  Foo;  "  "  Sabbath,  or  Lord's  Day,"  etc.  In  1889  he  visited  Europe, 
Palestine  and  Egypt.  He  has  held  thirty  religious  debates.  He  is  yet  in 
the  vigor  ot  life,  and  promises  great  usefulness  for  many  days. 


]). 


R. 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


D.    R.    DUNG  AN. 

Love  and  loyalty  to  God  are  seen  and  realized  through 
obedience  to  his  commandments.  1  John  5:3.  Ifc  was  said  of 
Zacliariah  and  Elizabeth  that  they  were  "  righteous  before  God, 
walking  in  the  commandments  and  ordinances  of  the  Lord 
blameless."  Luke  1:5,  6.  Christ  was  loyal  to  the  require- 
ments of  the  Old  Testament,  and  condemned  all  evasions  of  its 
ordinances  while  it  was  in  force.  Matt.  5 :  17-20.  And  if  that 
institution  was  regarded  as  so  sacred  that  one  jot  or  tittle  of  all 
its  demands  could  not  be  neglected  without  incurring  the  dis- 
pleasure of  Jehovah,  it  is  not  possible  that  he  should  be 
indifferent  to  any  appointment  in  the  New  Testament.  The 
sacrifices,  servants  and  services  of  the  Law  foretold  a  Savior 
that  was  to  come,  but  the  ordinances  of  the  New  Testament  tell 
of  a  Savior  that  has  come ;  tell  of  his  love,  his  death,  his  burial 
and  his  resurrection  for  our  redemption.  These  he  has  left  for 
us  to  keep  till  he  shall  return  again.  The  best  that  the  sacri- 
fices of  the  Law  could  promise  was  the  temporary  removal  of 
offenses,  carrying  them  forward  for  one  year  at  a  time  (Jer. 
36 :  31-34 ;  Heb.  8 :  6-13 ;  9  :  6-17;  10  :  1-4),  but  through  the  sac- 
rifice of  Christ  sins  once  forgiven  return  no  more.  In  Christ  we 
have  our  prophet,  priest  and  king,  clothed  with  all  authority  in 
heaven  and  earth,  who  directs  the  services  of  his  house  so  that 
his  work  of  redemption  shall  be  kept  constantly  in  mind.  Any 
neglect  of  these,  therefore,  cannot  fail  to  incur  his  displeasure. 
The  Lord's  Supper,  then,  is  not  something  that  may  be  observed 
or  forsaken  at  will ;  it  is  not  a  mere  form  that  may  be  kept  or 
not,  according  to  the  edict  of  a  church,  or  the  caprice  of  an  indi- 
vidual member. 

Many  of  the  services  required  of  the  ancients  were  unex- 

(231) 


232 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


plained ;  to  those  to  whom  they  were  given  they  seemed 
arbitrary,  and  containing  only  the  lesson  of  obedience  to  the 
will  of  God.  But  under  the  New  Covenant  we  are  treated  as  if 
we  had  attained  our  majority  ;  as  friends,  who  are  permitted  to 
know  what  our  Lord  doeth.  In  baptism  we  see  the  burial  and 
resurrection  of  the  Master,  and  in  the  communion  we  have  a 
picture  of  his  body,  bruised  on  our  account,  and  his  blood  shed, 
by  which  we  have  redemption.  Tliis  shows  the  reason  why 
Paul  praised  the  Corinthians  when  tliey  kept  the  ordinances  as 
they  were  delivered  to  them,  and  condemned  them  for  every 
failure.  1  Cor.  11 :  2,  17.  We  learn  from  Acts  20 :  7 ;  1  Cor. 
11 :  20 ;  16 :  1,  2,  that  it  was  the  custom  of  the  disciples  to  meet 
together  on  the  first  day  of  the  week  to  break  bread.  And  Paul 
leaves  a  positive  order  not  to  neglect  these  meetings.  Heb. 
10:  25. 

The  beginning  of  this  ordinance  may  be  seen  in  the  follow- 
ing Scriptures : 

Matt.  26 :  26-29 :  "And  as  they  were  eating,  Jesus  took 
bread,  and  blessed,  and  brake  it ;  and  he  gave  to  the  disciples, 
and  said.  Take,  eat ;  this  is  my  body.  And  he  took  a  cup,  and 
gave  thanks,  and  gave  to  them,  saying.  Drink  ye  all  of  it ;  for 
this  is  my  blood  of  the  New  Covenant,  which  is  shed  for  many 
unto  the  remission  of  sins.  But  I  say  unto  you,  I  will  not  drink 
henceforth  of  this  fruit  of  the  vine,  until  that  day  when  I  drink 
it  new  with  you  in  my  Father's  kingdom." 

Mark  14  :  22-25,  gives  so  nearly  the  same  words  already 
quoted  that  there  is  no  need  of  inserting  them  here.  But  in 
Luke  we  have  a  slight  addition,  hence  we  give  the  account  as 
found  in  that  book. 

Luke  22 :  19,  20  :  "And  he  took  bread,  and  when  he  had 
given  thanks,  he  brake  it,  and  gave  to  them,  saying,  This  is  my 
body  which  is  given  for  you ;  this  do  in  remembrance  of  me. 
And  the  cup  in  like  manner  after  supper,  saying.  This  cup  is 
the  New  Covenant  in  my  blood,  even  that  which  is  poured  out 
for  you." 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


233 


The  importance  of  the  institution  indicates  the  necessity  of 
observing  it  just  as  it  was  delivered.  But  in  deciding  this 
question,  we  must  not  mistalve  incidents  for  essentials.  There 
are,  too,  matters  of  propriety  that  we  can  hardly  say  are  either 
right  or  wrong  in  themselves.  And  yet  this  liberality  may 
extend  too  far,  and  the  whole  institution  be  given  away  by  an 
impropriety  that,  at  its  beginning,  could  have  been  borne  with, 
but  which  may  be  carried  to  the  extent  of  disloyalty  to  Christ. 

Certainly  the  Savior  did  not  direct  every  possible  thing  that 
might  occur,  as  to  the  hour  and  minute  of  the  day,  the  place 
wiiere  it  should  be  observed,  whether  one  or  more  than  one 
should  assist  in  distributing  the  bread  and  wine,  what  kind  of 
a  cup  and  plate  should  be  used,  the  posture  of  the  body  at  the 
time  of  participation.  These  and  a  hundred  others  like  them 
have  been  left  largely  to  the  consecrated  common  sense  of  those 
who  are  engaged  in  the  service.  Christ  met  the  disciples  in  a 
large  upper  room,  and  the  brethren  at  Troas  met  also  in  an 
upper  room,  but  nothing  may  be  pleaded  from  these  facts  that 
the  ordinance  demands  such  surroundings.  Bat  while  the  placa 
of  partaking  of  the  supper  is  left  to  the  disciples,  and  while  we 
regard  it  as  a  question  of  propriety,  still  such  indifference  to  the 
purity  of  the  communion  might  be  exhibited  in  the  selection  of 
place  that  the  institution  itself  would  be  invalidated.  "Decency 
and  order"  should  be  preserved,  and  while  some  irregularities 
and  improprieties  may  be  tolerated,  yet  the  line  of  decorum 
must  be  drawn  somewhere,  beyond  which  the  ordinance  is  not 
observed.  A  careful  reading  of  1  Cor.  11 :  17-34,  will  reveal  the 
fact  that  the  Church  had  gone  beyond  the  lines  of  propriety  so 
far  that  they  were  no  longer  eating  the  Lord's  Supper. 

THE  ELEMENTS    USED  LV   THE  SUPPEB. 

'■'•He  took  hread.''''  This  may  be  regarded  as  the  bread 
which  was  on  the  table  at  the  time.  It  had  been  prepared  by 
Peter  and  John  for  the  Passover,  of  which  they  were  then  par- 


234 


TEE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


taking.  That  this  bread  was  unleavened  has  never  been 
doubted.  No  other  would  have  been  admitted  at  that  time. 
Every  reference  to  the  supper,  that  throws  any  light  on  this  lirst 
emblem,  shows  that  it  was  a  loaf  or  roll ;  that  it  was  in  one 
piece ;  that  it,  at  the  beginning,  represented  the  Savior's  body 
in  its  unity,  but  that  it  had  to  be  broken  in  order  to  receive 
blessing  from  it.  When  he  took  it  in  his  hand,  he  did  not  say. 
This  is  my  body  broken  for  you  (See  the  Revision),  for  no  such 
a  figure  would  have  been  apparent  to  any  one  present ;  it  was 
not  broken  at  the  time — it  was  after  he  had  given  thanks  that 
"he  brake  it." 

A  beautiful  lesson  can  be  seen  in  the  use  of  the  roll  of 
unleavened  bread.  I  have  seen  this  lesson  covered  from  the 
sight  of  all  worshipers  by  having  two  or  three  rolls  or  loaves ; 
by  the  use  of  light  bread  which  could  not  represent  the  body  of 
the  Savior  with  any  propriety;  sometimes  there  are  plates  with 
several  hundred  pieces  or  small  cubes  of  light  bread.  This  may 
not  be  regarded  as  a  desecration  of  the  Lord's  Sujiper,  and  yet 
it  approximates  it  so  nearly  that  any  one  taught  in  the  word  of 
God  must  hesitate  respecting  the  propriety  of  participating.  In 
the  whole  affair  there  has  been  such  a  reckless  disregard  for 
what  the  Savior  did  and  required  us  to  do  till  he  come  again, 
that  it  hardly  amounts  to  more  than  a  fairly  well-executed 
caricature  on  the  institution.  While  we  may  bear  with  it  for 
the  time,  such  ignorance  or  indifference,  or  both,  should  not  go 
long  uncorrected.  There  may  be  those  who  can  discern  the 
Lord's  body  in  such  a  mutilated  service,  but  it  is  of  a  piece 
with  the  whole  line  of  human  substitutions  for  divine  teaching, 

TEE  CUP,  OR  FRUIT  OF  TEE  VINE. 

After  they  had  partaken  of  the  bread,  he  took  the  cup,  and 
after  he  had  given  thanks  he  gave  it  to  them  saying  :  "This  is 
the  blood  of  the  new  Covenant,  shed  for  many,  for  the  remission, 
of  sins." 


THE  LOnirS  SUITER. 


235 


By  the  word  cup  wo  are  to  understand  the  contents  of  the 
cup.  It  is  generally  understood  that  the  liquid  in  the  cup  was 
wine.  It  is  not  so  denominated,  however,  in  the  Scriptures.  It 
had  grown  into  a  custom  to  use  wine  on  the  occasion  of  the 
Passover.  This  wine  was  grape  juice  and  warm  water.  The 
Master  calls  it  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  which  indicates  to  us  the 
presence  of  wine.  It  is  quite  evident  that  it  had  been  prepared 
by  Peter  and  John  for  the  Passover,  and  was  on  the  table  for 
that  purpose.  It  is  generally  thought,  too,  that  the  removal  of 
all  leaven  from  their  houses,  as  well  as  from  the  feast  during 
this  week,  indicates  that  this  wine  could  not  have  been  alco- 
holic, as  the  fermentation  necessary  to  alcohol  is  the  same  thing 
that  should  be  put  out  of  the  camp  during  the  time  of  the  feast. 
But  since  the  cup  was  not  provided  by  the  law,  and  it  was  there 
by  sufferance  only,  it  is  hardly  safe  to  say  that  the  law  would 
be  strictly  regarded  in  a  custom  that  had  grown  up  independ- 
ently of  any  commandment.  The  Savior  did  not  object  to  the 
contents  but  used  the  cup  as  he  found  it.  He  calls  it,  the  fruit 
the  vine,  and  we  now  know  that  as  alcohol  is  produced  by  fer- 
mentation the  fruit  of  the  vine  disappears,  and  that  alcohol,  in 
full  proof,  has  no  connection  whatever  with  the  fruit  of  the  vine. 
The  Savior  used  it,  too,  as  the  best  possible  symbol  oi  the  blood 
by  which  the  world  should  be  saved.  And  we  now  know  that 
to  the  extent  that  any  liquid  contains  alcohol  it  does  not  sym- 
bolize (as  a  beverage)  anything  that  can  save,  but  that  which 
has  power  only  for  evil. 

But  there  are  others  who  maintain  that  the  cup  then  used 
contained  wine,  and  that  wine  always  contains  alcohol ;  that,  in 
order  for  grape  juice  to  become  wine,  it  must  ferment  and 
become  alcoholic.  They  find  proof  of  the  correctness  of  this 
position  in  the  statements  of  several  learned  Rabbis,  that  the 
wine  used  at  the  feast  of  the  Passover  was  fermented,  and  there- 
fore intoxicating.  Others  affirm  that  their  statements  are  the 
result  of  their  tradition  or  their  preferences.  But  the  position 
in  favor  of  the  use  of  alcoholic  wine  is  amended  so  as  to  assert 


23G 


THE  LOBD'S  SUPPER. 


that  there  is  no  wine  which  is  not  alcoholic,  that  the  presence  of 
alcohol  is  essential  to  the  existence  of  wine.  This  position  is  at 
this  time  regarded  hy  the  learned  as  exceedingly  rash,  unschol- 
arl}^  and  untrue.  While  we  have  but  a  very  limited  space  for 
the  discussion  of  this  feature  of  the  subject,  we  will  be  borne 
with  while  we  give  some  of  the  reasons  for  objecting  to  the  posi- 
tion. Oar  quotations  will  be  brief: 
I.    The  lexicons  and  lexical  men. 

1.  Webster:  "Wine,  the  expressed  juice  of  grapes." 

2.  Worcester  :  "  Must,  the  sweet  or  unfermented  juice  of  the 
grape :  new  wine." 

3.  Liddell  and  Scott :  "  GleuJcos,  sweet,  new  wine." 

4.  Groves:  "The  fresh  juice  of  the  grape,  must,  new  wine, 
and  mead." 

5.  Parkhurst :  "  Sweet  wine,  which  distills  of  its  own  accord 
from  the  grapes." 

6.  Robinson:     Must,  grape  juice  unfermented." 

7.  Andrew  :  "  Miistum,  new  or  unfermented  wine." 

8.  Leverett :  "  Must,  new  wine." 

9.  Anthon  :  "  Young,  new,  fresh ;  must,  new  wine." 

10.  Dr.  Ure  :  "Juice  newly  expressed,  and  before  it  has 
begun  to  ferment  is  called  must,  and  in  common  language,  new 
wine." 

11.  Ainsworth :  "  New  wine,  close  shut  up,  and  not  allowed 
to  work." 

12.  Littleton  gives  the  same  that  Ainsworth  does. 

13.  Smith's  Bible  Dictionary,  A.  M.  Ed.:  "It  may  be  at  once 
conceded  that  the  Hebrew  terms,  translated  wine,  refer,  occa- 
sionally, to  an  unfermented  liquor." 

14.  Stuart :  "  Facts  show  that  the  ancients  not  only  pre- 
served wine  unfermented,  but  regarded  it  as  of  higher  flavor 
and  finer  qualitj^  than  fermented  wine." 

15.  Barnes,  Note  on  John  2 :  10 :  "That  was  the  pure  juice 
of  the  grape." 


THE  LOBD'S  SUPPER. 


237 


16.  Kitto  :  "Wine,  asis,  denotes  the  expressed  juice  of  the 
grape,  or  other  fruit." 

17.  Thayer :  "  The  numerous  authorities  already  cited  to 
show  that  unfermented  grape  juice  is  wine,  also  prove  that 
unferraented  wine  existed." 

18.  Dr.  E.  Nott,  late  President  of  Union  College  :  "  That 
nnintoxicating  wines  existed  from  remote  antiquity,  and  were 
held  in  high  estimation  by  the  wise  and  good,  there  can  be  no 
reasonable  doubt.    The  evidence  is  unequivocal  and  plenary." 

19.  Roy.  Die.  Lond. :  "  Wine  pressed  from  the  grape  but  not 
fermented." 

20.  Dr.  Hilbert :  (Die.  Ger.  Lond.):  "Wine  pressed  from  the 
grape,  but  not  fermented:  new  wine." 

21.  Littre :  (Die.  de  la  language  Francais) :  "New  wine  not 
fermented." 

22.  Descherell:  "Wine  which  has  just  been  made,  and 
which  has  not  yet  fermented." 

23.  Scheller:  (Lexicon  1832):  "Wine  just  pressed  out  and 
not  strained." 

24.  Flugel:  (Die.  Ger.  and  Eng.):  " Unfermented  wine." 

25.  Freund  :  (Leipsic  1878) :  "  New  or  unfermented  wine." 

26.  Dr.  Adam  Clark:  (Com.  vol.  I.,  p.  239,  Lond.  Ed., 
1836,  Note  on  Gen.  40 :  11) :  "  From  this  we  find  that  wine 
anciently  was  the  mere  expressed  juice  of  the  grape  without  fer- 
mentation." 

Josephus  has  a  statement  of  this  passage  that  shows  the 
view  had  in  his  day  respecting  wine.  Antiq.  B.  IL,  ch.  5,  sec. 
2  :  "He  therefore  said  that  in  his  sleep  he  saw  three  clusters 
of  grapes  hanging  upon  three  branches  of  a  vine,  large  already 
and  ripe  for  gathering,  and  that  he  squeezed  them  into  a  cup, 
which  the  king  held  in  his  hand,  and  when  he  had  strained  the 
wine,  he  gave  it  to  the  king  to  drink,  and  he  received  it  from 
him  with  a  pleasant  countenance.  *  *  Thou  sayest  that 
thou  didst  squeeze  this  wine  from  three  clusters  of  grapes  with 
thine  hands,  and  that  the  king  received  it ;  know,  therefore,  that 


238 


THE  LOBD'S  SUPPER. 


this  vision  is  for  thy  good,  and  foretells  a  release  from  thy  pres- 
ent distress."  In  this  connection  the  word  wine  is  four  times 
applied  to  the  juice  that  the  butler  was  to  squeeze  from  the 
cluster  of  grapes,  into  the  cup  that  was  to  be  in  the  hand  of 
the  king. 

We  might  continue  this  line  of  investigation  almost  at  any 
length,  but  if  the  testimonies  already  presented  will  not  be  suffi- 
cient, a  declaration  from  one  having  arisen  from  the  dead  would 
be  of  no  avail.  While  it  is  conceded  that  wine  will  include  fer- 
mented liquor  from  grapes  or  other  fruits,  it  is  certain  that  it 
also  means  the  unfermented  juice.  If  not,  scholarship  must  pass 
for  nothing  and  the  classics  have  no  weight  in  determining  the 
meaning  of  words. 

II.  The  use  of  the  word  wine  in  the  JVeio  Testament 
accords  with  tlie  testimony  of  the  dictionaries  and  the  classics. 
About  half  of  the  time  it  is  so  surrounded  that  the  meaning  is 
unmistakably  that  of  unfermented  grape  juice. 

In  Acts  2:13  we  have  new  wine  from  gleuTcous^  which  was 
the  juice  of  the  grape  which  had  been  expressed  by  the  weight 
of  the  grapes  thrown  into  the  vat,  hence  sweet  wine.  This  was 
what  the  butler  gave  to  the  king  of  Egyj^t  though  he  pressed  it 
out  in  his  hands  instead  of  taking  it  fresh  from  the  wine  vat. 
But  some  one  insists  that  they  thought  the  apostles  were  drunk. 
True  enough,  and  yet  being  filled  with  gleukous  would  not 
indicate  it.  Look  at  the  passage  again,  and  see  that  it  was 
said  in  mockery.  They  meant  that  they  were  drunk,  but  they 
did  not  say  they  were.  We  use  the  same  sarcasm  when  we  say 
that  a  man  takes  too  much  tea.  We  mean  to  say  that  he  gets 
drunk,  but  we  say  it  ironically.  Elijah  suggested  that  the 
prophets  of  Baal  would  call  louder  :  "  He  is  a  god,"  but  he  may 
be  asleep,  in  conversation,  in  pursuit,  on  a  journey.  No  one 
thinks  for  a  minute  that  the  prophet  of  the  Lord  conceded  that 
Baal  was  a  God.  He  said  it  in  mockery,  hence  said  one  thing 
while  he  meant  another.  So  it  was  with  the  mockers  on  the 
Pentecost.    It  is  certain  that  then  the  word  wine  in  the  New 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


239 


Testament  did  not  necessarily  mean  fermented  liquor.  But  it 
may  be  said  that  oinos,  the  word  generally  employed  in  the 
New  Testament  for  wine,  means  a  fermented  liquor.  Not 
necessarily.  It  occurs  ten  times.  Matt.  9  :  17 ;  Luke  5  :  37 ; 
Mark  2:  22,  preceded  with  the  adjective  new.  The  illustration 
is  taken  from  making  wine  and  bottling  it,  hence  the  newly 
expressed  juice  was  the  thought  and  the  only  thought  that 
could  have  been  put  into  the  word.  The  fact  that  the  Savior  so 
surrounded  the  word  removes  the  question  from  the  field  of 
controversy.  So  in  John  2:  1-11,  making  wine  at  the  feast  of 
Cana ;  it  was  not  possible  for  it  to  have  contained  alcohol 
unless  the  Savior  created  it  on  purpose.  It  was  not  n^^essary 
to  the  wine,  nor  even  to  the  best  wine,  for  the  gleukos^  or  that 
which  had  been  kept  from  fermentation,  was  regarded  as  the 
best. 

If  they  had  fermented  grape  juice,  beyond  any  question 
they  would  call  it  oinos,  and  if  they  had  unfermented  liquor 
the}^  were  liable  to  use  the  same  term.  Hence  no  argument  can 
be  made  from  the  word  itself  since  it  had  the  same  meaning 
that  our  word  wine  has  (see  Groves),  and  we  have  seen  that 
wine  means  the  juice  of  grapes  or  other  fruit,  either  fermented 
or  unfermented.  If  therefore,  the  word  wine  had  been  used  by 
the  Savior  in  referring  to  the  supper,  instead  of  "  the  fruit  of 
the  vine,"  it  would  not  be  proof  that  any  intoxicating  liquor 
was  present. 

But  it  is  sometimes  said  that  the  Passover,  when  this  feast 
was  instituted,  was  six  months  from  the  time  that  the  wine  had 
been  made,  and  that  it  must  have  fermented  in  the  meantime. 
This  is  to  assume  that  they  were  not  able  to  preserve  the  juice 
in  an  unfermented  state.  But  this  is  not  correct.  In  the  refer- 
ences to  the  new  wine  the  process  was  that  of  preserving  it  from 
fermentation.  They  had  many  ways  of  keeping  the  fruit  of  the 
vine  free  from  any  alcoholic  condition. 

A  very  peculiar  argument  is  sometimes  constructed  from  1 
Cor.  11 :  21,  22,  that    the   Corinthians    used  wine   in  the 


240 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


supper  that  was  intoxicating,  and  that  while  Paul  condemned 
other  things  he  did  not  correct  them  in  this  respect.  Let  it  be 
noticed  too,  that  he  did  not  condemn  them  for  making  gluttons 
of  themselves  or  for  getting  drunk.  He  says  :  "  What,  have  ye 
not  houses  to  eat  and  drink  in  ?  or  despise  ye  the  church  of  God, 
and  shame  them  that  have  not  ?  "  It  might  be  argued  from  this 
that  Paul  had  no  objection  to  their  getting  drunk  if  they  would 
not  do  so  at  the  house  of  God,  but  wait  till  they  would  get 
home.  This  error  arises  from  the  supposition  that  the  apostle 
condemned  in  detail  all  that  was  wrong  in  their  procedure. 
This  is  not  true,  there  were  things  that  he  expected  to  set  in 
order  when  he  would  come  to  them,  and  all  that  he  had  then  to 
say  was  that  they  had  so  mutilated  the  supper  that  they  had 
destroyed  its  identity,  and  were  not  partaking  of  it  at  all. 

Since,  then,  there  is  no  evidence  that  the  Savior  instituted  his 
supper  with  the  use  of  alcoholic  wine,  since  he  did  not  use  the 
word  wine  at  all,  but  "  the  fruit  of  the  vine,"  and  since  we  know 
that  as  wine  ferments,  the  fruit  of  the  vine  diappears,  the  prob- 
abilities are,  at  least,  that  he  used  innocent  grape  juice  for  the 
communion.  This  is  further  indicated  by  the  symbolry  of  the 
institution :  it  was  to  represent  the  blood  by  which  the  world 
was  to  be  redeemed.  If  he  had  come  to  curse  the  race,  to 
destroy  men's  lives  "  and  not  "  to  save  them,"  no  more  appro- 
priate emblem  could  have  been  selected  than  some  alcoholic 
liquor,  but  as  his  work  was  the  salvation  of  the  race  no  more 
inappropriate  element  could  have  been  found  than  an  intoxi- 
cating beverage. 

There  is  a  fitness  in  the  selection  of  symbols  made  by  the 
Master.  The  unleavened  roll  and  the  fruit  of  the  vine  appro- 
priately represent  the  body  and  blood  by  which  sin  is  to  be 
removed  and  the  world  saved.  But  it  is  not  consistent  with  the 
character  and  teachings  of  Christ  to  suppose  that  he  would  use 
a  liquor  that  had  done  more  toward  the  corruption,  and  sorrow, 
and  poverty,  and  degradation  of  humanity  than  all  other  causes 


THE  LOBD'S  SUPPER. 


241 


combined,  to  symbolize  the  blood  that  was  shed,  for  the  remis- 
sion of  sins. 

Prudential  reasons  for  the  use  of  unfermented  wine  in  the 
Lord's  supper  are  very  strong. 

1.  There  is  no  sufficient  reason  why  this  innocent  wine 
should  not  be  used. 

2.  It  is  appropriate,  and  intoxicating  wine  is  not. 

3.  The  wine  that  is  bought  at  the  drugstore  is  sometimes 
devoid  of  any  of  the  fruit  of  the  vine,  it  is  made  wholly  of 
poisonous  drugs. 

4.  There  are  many  persons  who  are  endangered  by  the 
taste  of  fermented  liquor.  They  have  become  addicted  to  drink 
till  it  has  become  a  disease,  and  the  taste  of  alcohol  unbalances 
them  and  they  lose  control  of  themselves,  and  plunge  again 
into  drunkenness  because  of  the  poison  in  the  cup  that  was 
supposed  to  contain  a  blessing.  To  laugh  at  this  does  not 
change  the  facts  in  the  case  ;  very  many  such  persons  have 
been  known.  Since  the  danger  can  be  avoided,  it  is  an  evil  to 
continue  a  practice  that  endangers  any  portion  of  the  congrega- 
tion. 

5.  We  will  be  certainly  right  in  using  the  unfermented 
wine,  and  it  is  therefore  the  duty  of  the  rulers  of  every  congre- 
gation to  see  to  it  that  all  intoxicants  are  strictly  kept  out  of 
the  house  of  God. 

It  is  easier  to  point  out  the  things  that  should  be,  and  to 
warn  against  the  things  that  should  not  be,  than  to  determine 
how  far  such  improprieties  as  those  we  have  mentioned  should 
be  endured ;  when  it  becomes  sin  to  tolerate  them.  We  may 
not  be  at  liberty  to  raise  the  question  in  public,  nor  be  war- 
ranted in  absenting  ourselves  from  the  table  of  the  Lord,  but 
we  should  seek  the  removal  of  any  evils  of  the  kind. 

FOB  WHOM  WAS  THE  SUPPER  INTENDED'^ 

This  question  is  variously  answered.    Some  have  regarded 

16 


242 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


it  as  a  fellowship.  Hence  tliey  have  limited  it  to  their  own 
membership.  In  the  judgment  of  those  holding  this  view  of  the 
subject  it  is  entirely  improper  to  invite  those  of  other  commu- 
nions to  participate.  But  when  it  is  shown  that  the  communion 
is  not  church  fellowship,  but  that  it  is  the  communion  of  the 
body  and  blood  of  Christ,  and  that  it  belongs  to  all  the  children 
of  God,  there  is  nothing  left  but  to  claim  that  there  are  no  chil- 
.dren  of  God  except  those  of  that  communion  or  church.  That 
claim  now  meets  with  such  general  disfavor  that  but  very  few 
can  be  found  that  will  uphold  it. 

Others  with  much  more  seeming  consistency  claim  that  none 
but  immersed  believers  have  a  right  to  partake.  It  is  usually 
presented  in  this  way  :  the  supper  was  given  to  none  but  the 
Church  of  Christ,  that  church  contained  no  one  not  baptized, 
and  none  are  baptized  except  those  who  have  been  immersed- 
Hence  this  institution  belongs  to  none  except  immersed  believ- 
ers. This  view  is  generally  beset  with  difficulties.  It  affirms 
that  none  are  the  children  of  God  but  those  that  are  immersed, 
or  that  the  Lord  only  gave  the  supper  to  that  portion  of  his 
children  who  obeyed  him  in  that  ordinance.  There  is  an  appar- 
ent unwillingness  to  defend  either  of  these  positions.  The  sub- 
stance of  the  claim  is  this :  the  supper  was  intended  for  the 
children  of  God,  we  are  the  children  of  God  and  none  others  are, 
therefore  the  supper  belongs  to  us  and  to  us  alone. 

But  I  am  asked  for  the  position  we  take  on  the  subject.  It 
would  be  of  greater  value  to  inquire  what  the  Scriptures  teach 
on  the  subject.  It  is  certain  that  the  ordinances  of  the  Lord's 
house  belong  to,  and  were  intended  for  the  children  of  God.  It 
is  certain,  too,  that  the  children  of  God  had  been  immersed. 
Now,  the  therefore  is  easy. 

But  the  difficulty  is  not  so  easily  settled.  It  would  be  as 
correct  to  say  the  same  things  of  prayer,  but  are  we  at  liberty 
to  hinder  any  one  else  from  these  devotions  ?  By  what  we 
regard  as  a  mistake,  or  by  a  deception  of  the  apostasy,  affusion 
has  come  to  be  practiced  for  the  immersion  which  the  Savior 


THE  LOBD'S  SUPPER. 


243 


commanded,  and  persons  who  are  as  true  to  Christ  as  they 
know  how,  have  mistaken  this  substitute  for  the  obedience 
which  Christ  required ;  they  would  give  their  lives  for  the  honor 
of  the  Lord,  they  live  pure  lives,  and  now  the  question  comes, 
what  shall  we  do  with  them  ?  Shall  I  say  they  have  no  right 
to  this  table  because  they  have  been  mistaken  in  this  matter  ? 
But  some  one  says  you  do  not  prevent  them  from  communing, 
you  let  them  go  to  themselves.  But  they  may  not  be  able  to  do 
this.  And  again  if  they  are  not  fit  to  commune  at  the  table  of 
the  Lord  as  set  by  us,  have  they  any  more  a  right  anywhere 
else  ?  Shall  we  prevent  their  devotion  in  this  respect  till  they 
shall  have  come  to  have  our  knowledge  respecting  the  meaning 
of  haptizo  ? 

But  it  will  be  said  in  answer  to  this  that  no  one  in  the  days 
of  the  apostles  communed  who  had  not  been  immersed. 
Granted.  No  one  had  at  that  time  been  misled  concerning  this 
ordinance,  but  the  question  is :  what  would  the  Savior  and  the 
apostles  have  done  with  such  persons  if  they  had  met  with 
them  ;  what  would  they  do  now  ?  There  is  much  evidence  that 
when  the  Savior  instituted  the  supper,  Judas  Iscariot  was  pres- 
ent, and  if  present,  he  most  certainly  partook.  I  know  that  the 
force  of  this  is  tried  to  be  avoided  by  combining  the  feast 
recorded  in  the  thirteenth  chapter  of  John  with  the  Lord's 
supper,  but  this  is  incorrect,  and  the  rising  of  Judas  from  the 
table  that  night  was  to  go  and  make  the  first  bargain  with  the 
men  to  whom  he  was  to  deliver  the  Master.  And  when  the 
Lord  said  to  him  :  "  Whatsoever  thou  doest  do  quickly,"  the 
others  thought  that  he  said  something  about  providing  the 
things  that  would  be  needed  for  the  Passover.  But  no  such  a 
thought  would  have  come  into  any  mind  if  it  had  occurred  at 
the  Passover  feast. 

The  church  at  the  city  of  Corinth  had  members  in  it  that 
were  very  far  from  being  children  of  God  according  to  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Savior  and  the  apostles,  and  yet  there  was  no  objec- 
tion raised  to  them  respecting  the  Communion.    If  the  Master 


244 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


and  the  apostles  would  now  do  with  those  who  have  been  unfor- 
tunate enough  to  be  misled  respecting  baptism  as  they  did 
with  those  who  entertained  errors  for  which  they  were  more 
responsible,  there  would  be  no  bars  to  prevent  them  from  com- 
ing to  the  table  of  the  Lord.  I  think  they  would  plainly  teach 
them  the  duty  which  they  have  not  yet  performed,  but  having 
done  that,  they  would  not  prevent  any  devotion  which  might  be 
promj3ted  by  their  love  for  the  Savior. 

The  language :  "  Let  a  man  so  examine  himself  and  so  let 
him  eat  and  drink,"  has  been  taken  out  of  its  meaning.  It  does 
not  mean  to  decide  if  he  is  worthy  to  eat  and  drink.  It  related 
to  the  manner  of  his  eating  and  drinking.  On  the  other  point 
there  was  no  question  ;  that  they  had  a  right  to  commune  was 
not  under  discussion.  It  was  the  manner  of  their  partaking 
that  was  being  censured.  They  had  turned  the  breaking  of 
bread  into  a  kind  of  Sunday-Club-Dinner,  and  to  eat  and 
drink  thus  unworthily  was  to  eat  and  drink  damnation. 

There  should  be  clear  and  explicit  teaching  on  this  subject, 
and  then,  without  barring  up  the  institution,  there  will  be  no 
injurious  services  performed.  We  can  teach  plainly  as  to  the 
purpose  of  the  Lord's  house,  but  having  no  commission  on  the 
point,  we  are  not  at  liberty  to  organize  a  police  regulation  to 
prevent  those  who  have  not  learned  all  the  truth  from  trying  to 
serve  the  Lord. 

SHOULD  THE  LAITY  FAB  TAKE  OF  THE  WIXE? 

This  question  will  seem  strange  for  a  Protestant,  or  for  one 
not  in  the  Catholic  Church,  to  ask.  It  is  said,  however,  that 
when  the  Savior  instituted  this  supper,  there  were  none  present 
but  the  apostles,  and  therefore,  "  drink  ye  all  of  it"  has  no  ref- 
erence to  any  others ;  that  to  understand  the  privileges  of  other 
members,  we  are  left  wholly  to  other  Scriptures.  But  this  would 
relate  to  the  bread  as  well  as  to  the  juice  of  the  grape.  If  Christ 
gave  the  institution  simply  to  the  priests  and  intended  it  for 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


245 


them  only,  it  is  safe  to  say  that  the  apostles  did  not  understand 
his  teaching.  It  should  be  remembered  that  the  twelve  were 
not  only  apostles,  they  were  disciples,  and  that  all  that  consti- 
tuted the  services  of  the  heart  concerned  them  not  simply 
because  of  any  official  position  in  the  church,  but  because  they 
were  disciples  and  needed  the  same  means  of  growth  that  other 
disciples  did.  The  statement  in  Acts  20 :  7,  that  the  disciples 
met  together  to  break  bread  refers  to  the  institution  as  a  whole 
and  not  simply  to  the  use  of  one  element,  nor  does  1  Cor.  10: 17, 
"  For  all  partake  of  the  one  bread,"  refer  in  any  way  to  the  idea 
that  the  body  of  the  church  did  not  participate  in  the  use  of  the 
cup,  for  in  chapter  11  :  26  he  says  :  "  For  as  often  as  ye  eat  this 
bread,  and  drink  the  cup,  ye  proclaim  the  Lord's  death  till  he 
come."  The  same  persons  that  ate  the  bread  drank  the  cup. 
The  Catholic  Church  has  had  wars  on  this  point  and  many  have 
been  killed  for  their  faith  that  the  laity  were  entitled  to  the 
fruit  of  the  vine.  But  Jesus  wishes  to  be  remembered  by  all  of 
his  followers  in  the  use  of  that  which  represents  his  gift  both  of 
body  and  blood. 

WHEN  SHOULD  THE  CHUBCH  BBEAK  THE  BBEAD? 

The  idea  is  now  quite  prevalent  that  there  is  the  largest  lib- 
erty in  this  respect ;  that  a  church  can  elect  as  well  concerning 
this  question  as  the  time  and  place  of  the  jjrayer  meeting  ;  that 
there  was  nothing  indicated  by  the  Savior  when  he  says  :  "  As 
often  as  ye  do  this,  do  it  in  remembrance  of  me  till  I  come,"  as 
to  the  time  of  frequency.  Certainly  we  have  no  statement  of 
the  exact  time  of  their  meetings  for  that  purpose,  and  yet  we 
are  not  without  a  guide  in  the  matter.  In  Acts  20  :  7  there  is  a 
statement  that  is  indicative  of  the  practice  of  the  early  church, 
which  must  have  had  not  only  the  sanction  but  the  instruction 
of  the  apostles. 

Luke  has  some  peculiarities  as  well  as  other  writers,  and  in 
this  verse  is  one  of  them  :  the  use  of  the  word  when.  He  employs 


246 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


it  to  indicate  an  occurrence  that  was  everywhere  known,  and 
therefore  expected.  The  passage  becomes  significant  with  this 
explanation :  "  And  upon  the  first  day  of  the  week,  when  we 
were  gathered  together  to  break  bread,"  was  supposed  to  be 
anticipated  by  every  reader.  He  had  just  related  the  fact  that 
they  had  been  there  for  a  whole  week,  and  of  course  a  first  day 
would  occur,  and  on  that  first  day  the  disciples  would  be 
expected  to  meet  together  to  break  bread.  He  wishes  to  tell 
the  reader  about  Paul's  discourse  and  the  miracle  that  was 
wrought  by  him  that  night,  but  preceded  the  account  by  the 
announcement  that  every  one  would  anticipate.  Hence  he  says 
that  this  discourse  was  given  "  when  we  were  gathered  together 
to  break  bread."  You  will  see  the  use  of  the  word  in  Acts  8  : 
12  ;  "  wTieii  they  believed."  See  again  Acts  1(J :  15;  "  And  when 
she  was  baptized."  He  had  just  related  that  her  heart  was 
opened,  that  she  attended  to  the  things  spoken  by  Paul,  and 
every  one  would  expect  her  baptism  to  follow,  and  he  records 
it  in  that  way,  as  a  matter  of  course.  But  when  the  custom 
was  not  known  he  announced  it  as  a  matter  that  had  not 
been  understood  beforehand.  Acts  17:  1,  2,  3;  Luke  4:  16,  will 
show  the  difference  in  the  style  between  writing  things  that 
were  known  to  be  the  custom  and  recording  something  that  had 
not  been  known  before.  In  these  last  texts  he  notices  customs 
that  had  not  been  announced  and  were  not  supposed  to  be  mat- 
ters of  common  knowledge.  But  in  the  other  j^laces  the  style  is 
difierent. 

It  was  not,  then,  an  accident  that  they  met  together  on  a 
first  day  of  the  week  at  Troas  for  the  purpose  of  attending  to 
the  communion,  but  a  custom  was  announced,  which  announce- 
ment was  anticipated  b}^  every  one  who  knew  the  practices  of 
the  church.  This  is  further  seen  in  the  First  Corinthian  letter 
(11 :  17-34),  which  shows  that  when  they  met  together  it  was  for 
the  purpose  of  breaking  bread ;  and  in  16  :  1,  2,  we  learn  that  it 
was  their  practice  to  meet  together  on  every  first  da}^  of  the 
week.    It  was  not  simply  the  custom  in  the  city  of  Corinth,  but 


THE  LORD'H  SUPPER. 


247 


in  Galatia.  Now  the  recommendations  that  Paul  would  give  to 
the  churches  in  Galatia  respecting  their  meetings  would  come 
from  a  knowledge  of  the  time  when  they  were  held.  Putting 
these  two  facts  together,  we  have  it  that  first  they  met  together 
to  break  bread ;  this  was  the  main  purpose  of  their  meetings ; 
and  second,  that  they  met  together  on  every  first  day  of  the 
week.  From  this  it  is  the  conviction  of  the  most  eminent  men 
of  the  church  to-day  that  it  was  the  custom  of  the  first  church 
to  break  bread  on  every  first  day  of  the  week.  I  have  the  eight 
volumes  of  the  Ante-Nicene  Fathers,  and  without  exception  their 
references  indicate  that  they  so  practiced,  and  that  they  under- 
stood the  teaching  and  practice  of  the  church  during  the  days 
of  the  apostles  to  be  the  same.  Indeed,  they  claim  such 
practice  as  the  reason  and  authority  for  their  custom. 

In  the  Teaching  of  the  Apostles,  which  is  supposed  to  have 
been  written  about  A.  D.  120,  in  chapter  14  we  find  this  :  But 
every  Lord's  day  do  ye  gather  yourselves  together,  and  break 
bread,  and  give  thanks  after  having  confessed  your  transgres- 
sions, that  your  sacrifice  may  be  pure.  But  let  no  one  that  is 
at  variance  with  his  fellow  come  together  with  you,  until  they 
be  reconciled,  that  your  sacrifice  may  not  be  profaned.  For 
this  is  that  which  was  spoken  by  the  Lord  :  '  In  every  place 
and  time  offer  to  me  a  pure  sacrifice,  for  I  am  a  great  king, 
saith  the  Lord,  and  my  name  is  wonderful  among  the  nations.'  " 

In  the  First  Apology  of  Justin,  chapter  67,  we  have  the  cus- 
tom described,  that  of  assembling  and  having  the  Scriptures 
read,  and  remarks  made  on  them,  then  engaging  in  prayer  and 
breaking  of  bread.  This  they  did  on  the  day  that  was  "  called 
Sunday."  Of  course,  since  Justin  was  writing  to  an  emperor, 
he  used  the  word  Sunday  for  the  first  day  of  the  week,  instead 
of  the  Lord's  day  that  was  nearly  always  used  by  the  Fathers, 
that  he  might  be  understood.  In  the  writings  of  these  men,  two 
things  are  apparent:  first,  they  are  everywhere  agreed  as  to  the 
custom  of  meeting  together  on  the  first  day,  or  Lord's  day,  for 


248 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


the  purpose  of  breaking  bread ;  and  second,  they  are  agreed 
that  this  teaching  was  from  the  apostles. 

An  objection  has  just  been  raised  against  weekly  com- 
munion on  account  of  the  frequency,  which  it  is  claimed  will 
render  it  so  common  as  to  hinder  the  impression  that  it  should 
make  on  those  who  attend  upon  it.  This  same  objection  is 
urged  against  prayer  being  offered  daily,  so  it  has  been  thought 
that  it  should  be  only  after  such  intervals  as  will  render  it  more 
awe-inspiring.  So  the  priests  should  have  gone  occasionally 
and  lighted  the  lamps  and  burned  the  incense.  But,  again,  it  is 
said  that  the  time  is  not  definitely  fixed  by  a  direct  statement. 
As  a  command,  this  is  true.  We  learn,  however,  what  was 
regarded  as  proper  in  the  days  of  the  apostles,  when  the 
churches  were  under  the  direction  of  their  inspiration,  and 
follow  the  example,  believing  that  they  were  right,  and  that 
what  was  right  then  is  right  now.  If  we  do  as  the  churches  did 
when  under  the  control  of  inspired  men  in  the  matters  of  public 
worship,  we  will  certainly  be  safe. 

BUT  WHAT  TIME  OF  THE  DAY  SHOULD  WE  BREAK  BREAD  9 

It  was  instituted  in  the  evening,  but  if  this  time  is  to  guide 
us,  it  should  occur  on  Friday  and  not  on  the  Lord's  day.  There 
is,  perhaps,  no  more  in  the  exact  hour  in  which  it  was  instituted 
than  in  the  large  upper  room  in  which  it  occurred.  The  Master 
took  the  occasion  of  the  Passover  to  give  this  new  ordinance. 
Something,  however,  is  supposed  to  be  gained  by  the  word 
"supper,"  deipnon,  used  by  Paul  in  reference  to  it  in  1  Cor. 
11 :  20.  Yet  it  is  easy  to  make  more  out  of  the  word  here  used 
than  there  is  in  it.  Deipnon,  the  word  in  question,  is  used 
interchangeably  in  the  classics  with  ariston  and  dorpon,  and 
stands  for  a  meal  of  any  kind.  Nitzsch  holds  it  to  be  the  prin- 
cipal meal  whenever  taken.  Liddell  and  Scott  say,  "  Certainly 
the  chief  meal,  answering  to  our  dinner.''  Paul  shows  that  it 
was  not  a  literal  supper,  and  that  the  mistake  made  by  the 


TEE  LORD'S  SUPrER. 


249 


Corinthians  on  that  point  was  to  fail  utterly  of  its  true  import. 
It  consisted  only  of  the  bread  and  cup. 

The  first  church  understood  the  occasion  as  one  of  gladness 
because  the  Savior  had  risen  from  the  dead,  and  had  promised 
to  return  to  them  again.  As  Christ  rose  in  the  morning  of  the 
first  day  of  the  week,  it  could  be  argued  that  the  disciples 
should  meet  in  the  morning  for  that  purpose.  And  there  are 
reasons  to  believe  that  they  did  this  in  many  places  during  the 
second  century,  but  whether  from  conviction  respecting  the  time 
that  the  ordinance  should  be  observed,  or  because  of  the  perse- 
cutions, and  the  necessity  of  holding  all  meetings  in  secret,  is 
not  certain.  Under  ordinary  circumstances,  reason  would  say 
that  it  should  be  at  such  a  time  that  the  aged  and  infirm  could 
be  present.  This  is  almost  impossible  if  put  in  the  night. 
Hence  the  most  suitable  time  for  convenience  has  been  selected 
by  the  church  in  all  ages,  except  in  the  times  of  persecution. 


THE  POSTURE  m  WHICH  IT  SHOULD  BE  RECEIVED. 


Of  course  there  is  no  statement  respecting  the  position  of 
the  body  during  the  time  of  the  communion.  There  is  a  custom 
descendent  from  Catholicism  that  required  the  kneeling  posture. 
But  this  has  come  from  regarding  the  loaf  and  cup  as  repre- 
senting the  real  presence  of  the  Savior,  and  hence  they  regard 
it  as  a  divinity  and  feel  that  it  is  proper  to  kneel  in  its  pres- 
ence. As  they  partook  of  the  food  in  a  reclining  posture,  it  is 
very  probable  that  it  was  observed  in  that  way  in  the  begin- 
ning. They  were  at  the  table  and  had  been  eating  of  the 
Passover,  and  all  probabilities  are  in  favor  of  the  idea  that 
they  continued  in  that  posture  during  the  communion.  The 
early  church,  according  to  Tertullian,  performed  all  services  on 
the  Lord's  day  while  standing,  to  indicate  their  joy,  and 
regarded  kneeling  on  that  occasion  as  sacrilege.  But  for  this 
there  is  no  more  authority  than  for  reclining  on  the  left  elbow. 


250 


TEE  LOBD'S  SUPPER. 


It  is  one  of  those  questions  concerning  which  the  Lord  has  seen 
proper  to  leave  us  uninstructed.  "  Let  emrything  he  done 
decently  and  in  order.'''' 

WHAT  NA2IE  SHOULD  BE  GIVEY  TO  THE  OBDmANCE? 

Some  one  will  regard  this  as  a  very  unimportant  question, 
but  it  is  not.  Falsehoods  are  many  times  perpetuated  by  terms 
that  are  misleading.  Both  Paul  and  Peter  exhort  us  to  speak 
of  the  things  of  the  Spirit  in  the  language  of  the  Spirit.  In 
this  way  we  will  not  only  have  the  right  thoughts  but  the  right 
words  in  which  to  express  them.  The  word  Eucharist  contains 
but  a  single  thought  in  the  institution,  that  of  giving  thanks — 
from  eu,  well,  and  charista — grace  or  thanks.  "Sacrament" — 
an  oath — is  nearly  meaningless.  The  Scripture  terms  are  very 
much  better :  Lord's  Supper,  Breaking  of  Bread,  the  Commun- 
ion. These  terms  bring  up  the  facts  and  thoughts  of  the 
ordinance.  It  is  more  than  giving  of  thanks,  it  is  more  than 
oath ;  it  is  the  communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  tlie  Lord. 
The  word  Host  was  used  by  the  Catholics  and  is  yet  to  some 
extent.  But  this  only  for  the  Bread,  after  the  consecration. 
This  name  came  from  the  idea  that  by  the  services  of  the  priest 
it  had  become  the  veritable  body  of  the  Christ.  But  that  these 
forms  of  expression  have  ever  come  into  existence  is  proof  that 
there  were  thoughts  that  the  Bible  does  not  contain.  If  men 
had  no  other  thoughts  than  those  found  in  the  Scriptures  then 
their  thoughts  and  ideas  could  be  expressed  by  the  use  of  the 
words  found  in  the  Bible.  I  propose  then  a  retnrn  in  this  par- 
ticular, and  to  speak  of  those  things  which  the  Bible  teaches, 
and  in  the  language  in  which  the  Bible  speaks  of  them. 

WHAT  OF  TBANSUBSTANTIATIOX  AND  CONSUBSTANTIATIOm 

Transubstantiation  is  the  doctrine  that  in  the  consecration 
by  the  service  of  the  priest,  the  substance  of  the  bread  and  wine 


THE  LOnD\S  SUPPER. 


251 


is  made  into  the  very  body  and  blood  of  the  Redeemer.  This, 
like  all  other  enormities  of  the  Apostasy,  has  had  a  history,  and 
has  been  presented  in  many  different  phases.  Augustine  intro- 
duced the  doctrine  of  purgatory  and  Transubstantiation  in  a 
mild  form.  He  maintained  that  the  Logos  dwelt  in  the  bread 
and  wine  as  he  had  done  in  the  body,  and  that  it  was  in  this 
way  that  he  said,  ^Hhis  ismyhodyy  Paschasius  Radbertus, 
about  the  year  831,  wrote  a  book  in  which  he  took  the  position 
which  has  since  become  a  Romish  doctrine.  But  it  gave  great 
offense  at  the  time  to  many  of  the  authorities,  and  was  finally 
adopted  after  many  a  heated  debate.  It  was  a  century  and 
more  in  becoming  orthodox,  during  which  time  it  was  sometimes 
orthodox  to  believe  that  the  bread  and  wine  became  body  and 
blood  only  as  it  was  received  by  faith,  that  all  that  part  that  was 
not  received  was  not  thus  changed.  They  were  never  able  to 
say  whether  all  the  bread  and  wine  thus  consecrated  was 
digested  or  not.  Luther  held  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantia- 
tion. Sometimes  the  idea  prevailed  that  was  called  Consub- 
stantiation,  and  there  was  fierce  war  between  the  friends  of  the 
different  theories,  though  to  read  the  arguments,  one  does  not 
know  on  which  side  the  writer  is.  Those  holding  that  view 
believed  that  the  actual  presence  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the 
Christ  was  substantially  present  with  the  bread  and  wine. 
Substantially  and  with  were  their  varying  words  and  made 
difference  enough  to  continue  the  wrangle. 

It  seems  strange  that  any  one  should  ever  have  committed 
the  blunder  of  supposing  that  the  Savior  meant  his  disciples  to 
understand  that  he  then  held  his  own  body  in  his  hand.  It 
would  be  as  reasonable  to  demand  a  literal  interpretation  when 
he  says,  "I  am  the  door  of  the  sheep;  "  '"I  am  the  vine,  and  my 
Father  is  the  husbandman;"  "I  am  the  way,"  or  road.  To 
interpret  any  of  these  statements  literally  is  to  remove  their 
significance  and  value.  That  God  could  create  man  is  not 
doubted  by  any  believer;  but  that  a  priest,  by  pronouncing  a 
few  Latin  words,  can  create  divinity  out  of  a  piece  of  bread, 


252 


THE  LOBD-S  SUPPEB. 


would  seem  too  much  for  the  faith  of  any  sane  person.  But  it 
is  claimed  that  the  Master  refers  to  this  ordinance  in  the  sixth 
chajiter  of  John,  when  he  says,  "  My  flesh  is  meat  indeed,  and 
my  blood  is  di'iuk  indeed."  There  is  no  evidence  that  this 
statement  contains  any  reference  to  the  Lord's  Supper  any  more 
than  to  any  other  service  which  he  had  required.  Perhaps  this 
series  of  metaphors  is  less  understood  than  almost  2Lnj  other 
portion  of  the  Xew  Testament.  He  is  followed  physically  by  a 
number  of  those  who  were  anxious  for  the  loaves  and  fishes,  and 
it  is  the  purpose  of  the  Master  to  make  them  understand  that 
the  temporal  food  given  their  fathers  in  the  wilderness  was  not 
that  blessing  which  could  save  them,  or  give  them  life;  that 
none  could  come  to  the  Father  except  through  him,  and  that 
none  could  come  to  him  unless  drawn  by  the  Father  by  hearing 
and  learning  of  God.  Hence,  the  whole  lesson  is  to  show  them 
the  necessity  of  mental  or  spiritual  feeding,  that  they  might 
have  eternal  life  abiding  in  them.  So  he  came  to  furnish  them 
bread  and  drink  by  giving  himself  for  them,  and  they  were  to 
come  and  eat  him,  not  physically,  but  mentally  or  spiritually : 
believe  in  him,  have  fellowship  with  him,  walk  in  the  light  of 
his  truth,  imitate  his  life,  walk  in  him  and  be  saved  by  him. 


THE  PUBPOSE  OF  THE  EMBLEMATIC  LOAF  AXD  CUP. 


It  was  to  show  forth  the  Lord's  death  till  he  shall  come 
again.  It  is  the  communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  the  Lord. 
It  causes  every  true  disciple  to  discern  the  Lord's  body  and 
blood,  and  thus  to  remember  the  redemption  price.  It  shows 
the  oneness  of  those  who  constitute  the  church,  "  For  we  are  one 
body  and  one  bread."  It  fills  all  believers'  hearts  with  joyous 
anticipation  respecting  the  second  coming  of  the  Master.  "Do 
this  in  remembrance  of  me  till  I  come  again."  How  sweet  it 
would  be  to  go  to  the  presence  of  the  Lord  from  the  communion 
table  !  The  service  is  full  of  meaning  to  every  believer,  and  of 


THE  LORD'S  SUPPER. 


253 


great  value  to  every  child  of  God.  It  signifies  our  gathering 
together  to  him  at  a  great  day,  and  should  therefore  be  a  time 
of  rejoicing  in  the  hope  of  a  great  feast  reserved  in  the  heavens 
for  all  who  are  finally  faithful. 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED? 


ALVIN  I.  HOBBS,  LL.  D. 

For  three  hundred  years  after  the  Church  of  Christ  began, 
the  issues  in  respect  to  conversion  were  not  sharply  defined. 
The  belief  was  general  that  all  men  are  born  with  a  certain 
depravity  of  moral  inclinations.  Hence,  all  become  sinners 
and,  therefore,  are  proper  subjects  of  conversion.  It  was  as 
generally  held  that  conversion  is  effected  by  the  co-operation  of 
the  Holy  Spirit  with  the  human  will.  Or,  as  a  church  Historian 
says,  it  was  believed  that  "  the  free  action  of  the  will  is  the 
condition  and  the  concomitant  of  all  the  operations  of  grace." 

Towards  the  close  of  the  fourth  century  the  speculative  sys- 
tem of  doctrine  afterwards  defined  and  advocated  by  Augus- 
tine began  to  attract  attention.  He  taught  that  the  sin  of 
Adam  is  the  sin  of  the  whole  race  in  such  extent  that  its  guilt 
and  penalty  are  the  heritage  of  every  human  being.  Hence, 
all,  even  infants,  are  liable  to  eternal  damnation.  Further,  that 
all  have  inherited  such  a  coiTuption  of  nature  as  enslaves  the 
human  will  to  a  principle  of  sin  dominant  in  every  soul.  He, 
therefore,  "  ascribed  conversion  wholly  to  the  efficiency  of 
divine  grace,  which  touches  the  springs  of  choice,  is  irresistible, 
and  is  bestowed  on  those  (the  elect  only)  whom  God  has  pro- 
posed to  received  to  himself." 

The  essential  elements  of  this  doctrine  were  reproduced  in 
Calvinism.  As  Pelagianism  was  a  reaction  from  Augustinian- 
ism,  so  Arminianism  was  a  rebound  from  Calvinism.  Pelagian- 
ism fell  rightly  under  the  ban  of  heresy,  while  some  elements 
of  Augustine's  doctrine  failed  of  Synodical  approval.  Armin- 
ianism rejects  predestination  and  irresistible  grace;  but,  incon- 
sistently and  without  the  pretext  of  an  eternal  elective  decree, 

(254) 


.  no  BUS. 


Alvix  I.  IIoBBS  was  born  March  13,  1834,  of  Abner  and  E.  A.  (Lathrop) 
Hobbs,  in  Ripley  county,  Ind.  In  1837  the  family  home  was  fixed  in  Greens- 
burg,  Ind.  In  1847  he  entered  the  church.  Having  alreatly  worked  in  a 
printing  office  he  was  apprenticed  to  J.  M.  Mathes  and  Elijah  Goodwin, 
editors  of  the  Ckrisdan  lUvord.  published  at  Bloomington,  Ind.  After  two 
years,  in  1849,  lie  returned  home  and  entered  school.  In  l.s51,  in  a  small 
way,  he  entered  into  mercantile  business,  and  continued  in  it  until  1858. 
Meantime,  he  was  being  urged  to  exercise  his  natural  gifts  in  preaching.  In 
1854  he  was  ordained  to  the  ministry.  From  this  time  calls  for  preaching 
multiplied  until,  weary  of  a  divided  life,  he  sold  out  his  business  and  entered 
Butler  (t lien  Xorth-AVestern  Christian)  University,  in  1858,  from  which  he 
graduatetl  with  first  honors  in  1S62. 

Ten  years  before,  lie  iiad  married  Miss  Rachel  Longan  of  Greensburg, 
Ind.,  Avho  still  shares  his  burdens  and  joys.  Of  five  children,  thi-ee 
daughters,  all  married,  survive. 

In  18G2  Bro.  Ilobbs,  having  located  in  Richmond,  Ind.,  was  elected 
Chaplain  of  the  69th  Regiment,  Vols.  Infantry,  and  received  the  appointment 
of  Gov.  O.  P.  Morton.  In  1803  he  returned  home,  broken  in  health  and 
remained  so  for  three  years.  Since  then  lie  has  occupied  several  prominent 
pulpits  of  the  larger  cities  of  the  midtlle  and  western  states. 

In  1890  he  was  chosen  Dean  of  the  Bible  College  of  Drake  University, 
Des^Ioines,  Iowa.  This  position  he  now  holds  and  is  giving  to  it  the  best 
energies  of  liis  life. 

While  it  is  as  a  preacher  and  pulpit  orator  that  Bro.  Hobbs  is  best 
known,  he  has  written  many  articles  for  our  periodical  literature  and  a  num- 
ber of  tracts — as  "  The  I'liilosophy  of  Getting  lieligion,"  and  "Why  I  Am  a 
Disciple,"  which  show  that  he  can  write  also  with  great  force. 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  IIOW  PRODUCED'}  255 

leaves  the  sinner  helpless  and  doomed  unless  the  Holy  Spirit 
shall  by  omnipotent  power  regenerate  him,  or  make  his  conver- 
sion possible  by  a  precedent  miracle.  Tliat  the  "  flesh,"  (Rom. 
7 :  18)  has  in  it  no  good  thing  as  a  result  of  Adamic  sin,  in  part 
at  least,  on  account  of  which  there  is  perpetual  antagonism 
between  the  flesh  and  the  spirit  of  every  man,  there  is  every 
reason  to  believe,  but  to  carry  this  notion,  or  any  other,  to  the 
extreme  that  man's  nature  is  so  corrupted  by  original  sin  that 
his  moral  responsibility  is  destroyed,  makes  it  impossible  to 
vindicatH  God's  justice  in  punishing  sin  here  or  hereafter. 

That  the  initiative  in  conversion  springs  from  the  will  by 
the  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  gratefully  admitted ;  but  the 
co-operative  agency  of  the  sinner  must  also  be  afiirmed.  Other- 
wise, a  fatalistic  element  enters  which  fosters  spiritual  pride,  or 
casts  the  sinner  down  into  despair.  These  evils  were  attendant 
upon  Augustinianisra  and  are  yet  the  legitimate  fruits  of 
kindred  systems  of  doctrine.  And,  as  in  the  past,  so  now,  they 
furnish  good  reasons  for  the  rejection  of  the  doctrines. 

The  writer  would  prefer  to  treat  the  subject  without  reference 
to  unscriptural  theories.  But  metaphysical  subtleties  have 
clouded  the  Scriptures.  The  clouds  must  be  dissipated.  Clear 
views  of  the  word  of  God  should  be  secured. 

For  distinct  and  yet  not  wholly  independent  treatment,  the 
question  divides  into  two : 

1.  What  is  Convkksion? 

2,  How  IS  IT  Produced  ? 

But,  first,  a  provisional  statement.  Conversion  is  a  Scrip- 
tural process  through  which  a  sinner  becomes  a  Christian.  It 
involves  a  turning  from  the  love  and  service  of  sin  to  the  love 
and  service  of  God  by  faith  in  Christ. 

Now,  let  us  determine  what  conversion  is  not.  It  is  not 
merely  a 

CHANGE  OF  OPINIONS. 

One  may  give  up  Calvinism  for  Arminianism,  Unitarianism 


256 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED'} 


for  Triiiitarianism,  Buddhism  for  Christianity,  or  the  reverse, 
without  achieving  anything  more  than  an  intellectual  somer- 
sault. 

It  is  not  simply  a  change  of  the 

OUTER  MORAL  HABITS. 

Morality  is  not  religion.  Moral  habits  may  be  formed  by 
worldly  culture.  Many  of  vicious  habits  have  exchanged  them 
for  good  ones  without  reference  to  religion.  True,  no  moral 
code  is  practicable  for  the  race  which  does  not  root  itself  in 
religion.  Yet,  some  persons  of  trained  moral  equipoise  able  to 
check  appetite  and  passion  on  the  hither  side  of  vicious  habits, 
are  apt  to  contrast  their  seeming  virtue  with  the  moral  slips  of 
frail  Christians.  Such  are  too  much  occupied  in  Pharisaic  self- 
adulation  to  perceive  their  own  spiritual  inferiority.  The  polish 
of  worldly  culture  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  fruit  of  real 
conversion. 

It  is  not  a  mere  change  of  disposition  from  unfriendliness  or 
selfishness  to 

BENEVOLENCE— GOOD  WILL  TO  MEN. 

It  involves  this,  but  far  more.  Unless  kindliness  to  men  be 
underlaid  with  loyalty  and  love  to  God,  it  will  soon  degenerate 
into  a  splendid  vice.  That  amiability  which  conceals  or  mutil- 
ates truth  merely  to  please,  is  nothing  but  vicious  indifference. 
It  is  disloyalty  to  God.  A  vaunted  charity,  even  in  the  pulpit, 
which  sacrifices  sound  doctrine  on  the  altar  of  worldly  applause 
is  supreme  selfishness.  That  sort  of  liberalism  which  exalts 
beneficence — works  of  charity — above  the  blood  of  Christ  as  an 
atonement  for  sin,  and  teaches  sinners  to  depend  upon  it  as  a 
meritorious  cause  of  salvation,  only  turns  what  is  praiseworthy 
in  itself,  into  a  whirlpool  of  damnation.  All  works  of  charity 
done  in  the  name  of  and  for  the  love  of  Christ  will  receive  a 
reward,  otherwise  they  may  become  mere  moral  dilettanteism. 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  IlOW  PRODUCED^ 


257 


Conversion  is  not  simply  a  revulsion  of  feeling  commonly 
called 

GETTING  RELIGION. 

Religion,  rather,  should  get  us.  This  revulsion,  often  wit- 
nessed at  the  anxious-seat,  is  supposed  to  be  miraculous.  But 
to  account  for  a  natural  effect  by  a  supernatural  cause  is  fanat- 
ical. In  Revival  Lectures,  p.  253,  President  Finney,  an  ardent 
advocate  of  this  method  of  conversion,  says :  "  The  design  of 
the  anxious-seat  is  undoubtedly  philosophical  and  according  to 
the  laws  of  the  mind."  Thus,  it  is  admitted  that  this  revulsion 
of  feeling  is  secured  by  a  natural  cause  under  natural  laws. 
Two  laws  only  need  be  noted:  1.  We  feel,  in  respect  to 
matters  of  faith,  as  we  believe.  2.  The  belief  of  a  falsehood 
affects  the  feelings  in  the  same  way  as  belief  of  the  truth,  pro- 
vided, the  falsehood  appears  to  be  true.  All  emotional  activity 
in  the  sphere  of  faith  is  controlled  by  these  laws.  The  Roman 
Catholic  believes  he  has  sinned.  Feels  guilty,  depressed. 
Believes  that,  on  confession,  he  can  receive  absolution  from  the 
priest.  He  departs  happy.  Is  this  conversion  ?  Jacob  believed 
Joseph  dead,  mourned  deeply.  Afterwards  believed  him  alive, 
and  rejoiced. 

The  rule  as  to  pardon  is  :  "The  conditions  complied  with, 
the  promise  is  sure,  with  peace  and  joy  as  the  result."  Yet  the 
evangelist  who  formulated  this  rule,  taught  the  sinner  that : 

"Jesus  has  promised  his  sins  to  forgive 
.  If  we  ask  in  simple  faith  for  his  love." 

In  vain  do  we  search  the  Scriptures  for  such  a  promise. 
Still,  without  faith  none  can  be  forgiven. 

It  is  quite  the  fashion  now  to  jjromise  pardon  to  all  who 
"will  only  believe."  Jesus  said:  "He  that  believeth  and  is 
baptized  shall  be  saved  " — pardoned.  But  these  terms  are  dis- 
counted by  a  sophistical  use  of  the  answer  of  Paul  and  Silas  to 
the  jailer.  Acts  16:  31,  "  Believe  on  the  Lord  Jesus  and  thou 
shalt  be  saved."    They  did  not  say,  "believe  only."  They 


258          CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED^ 


immediately  preached  to  him  the  word  of  the  Lord  that  he 
might  know  what  else  was  requisite.  "  And  he  took  them  the 
same  hour  of  the  night  and  was  baptized."  Then  he  rejoiced, 
was  hai^py.    Cf.  Acts  2 :  37,  38,  and  Acts  22  :  10-16. 

Those  who  pervert  ihe  gospel  seem  to  think  if  any  overt  act 
of  obedience  is  required  in  order  to  pardon,  that  the  doctrine  of 
salvation  by  grace  through  faith  is  nullified.  But  the  gospel 
"  was  made  known  to  all  nations  for  the  obedience  of  faith," 
which  Paul  seems  never  to  have  thought  of  as  an  equivalent  of 
Judaistic  "works  of  righteousness"  by  which  justification  is 
impossible.  The  "obedience  of  faith,"  or  its  several  steps,  are 
but  means  of  grace,  and  in  no  sense  a  ground  of  merit  as  the 
Jews  regarded  "works  of  righteousness,"  or  deeds  of  law. 
Instead,  therefore,  of  urging  all  the  gospel  terms  of  pardon  upon 
the  sinner,  and  the  appended  promise,  the  custom  is  to  exhort 
him  to  "believe  only,"  and  to  expect  the  evidence  of  the  remis- 
sion of  sins  in  a  change  of  feeling. 

Conversion  is  not  what  some  theologians  call 

BEGENEBATION. 

In  Systematic  Theology,  Vol.  3,  p.  31,  Dr.  Hodge  says : 
"  Regeneration  is  not  only  an  act  of  God,  but  also  an  act  of 
his  almighty  power.  .  .  .  If  an  act  of  omnipotence,  it  is  cer- 
tainly eflicacious,  for  nothing  can  resist  almighty  power."  "The 
assertion  that  regeneration  is  an  act  of  God's  omnipotence  is, 
and  is  intended  to  be,  a  denial  that  it  is  an  act  of  moral  suasion. 
It  is  an  affirmation  that  it  is  'physical'  in  the  old  sense  of  that 
word,  as  opposed  to  moral ;  and  that  it  is  immediate,  as  opposed 
to  mediate,  or  through  and  by  the  truth." 

To  make  this  meaning  more  forcible  he  contends  that  it  is  a 
miracle  like  restoring  sight  to  the  blind,  or  like  raising  Lazarus 
from  the  dead. 

Hence,  regeneration  may  occur  without  the  preaching,  belief 
of,  or  obedience  to,  the  gospel.     Consistently,  he  holds  that 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED?  259 

infants,  as  well  as  adults,  are  its  subjects.  By  the  system  last 
reviewed,  conviction  of  sin  is  secured  by  the  gospel;  in  the  case 
of  adults,  their  conversion  follows  as  a  miracle — the  sinner  being 
passive.  Dr.  Hodge  holds  conversion  to  be  a  duty  in  which  the 
sinner  is  active,  but  that  the  precedent  regeneration  is  by  a 
miracle  in  which  the  sinner  is  passive.  But,  on  j).  16,  with 
strange  inconsistency,  he  says :  "  It  is  the  soul  that  is  spirit- 
ually dead ;  and  it  is  to  the  soul  (in  regeneration)  that  a  new 
principle  of  life,  controlling  all  its  exercises,  whether  of  the 
intellect,  the  sensibilities,  the  conscience,  or  the  will,  is 
imparted."  But  if  the  new  principle  controls  the  will,  how  is 
conversion  an  act  of  the  sinner's  own  volition?  It  must  be  an 
inevitable  consequence  of  regeneration.  It  is  as  miraculous  at 
the  second  step  as  is  regeneration  at  the  first. 

Moreover,  if  any  sinner  be  not  converted,  logically,  God  is 
responsible.  If  finally  lost,  it  cannot  be  the  sinner's  fault.  If 
God  shall  punish  the  sinner  here  or  hereafter,  how  can  his  jus- 
tice be  vindicated?  The  learned  doctor  saw  the  difficulties 
involved  and  wrestled  manfully  with  them,  but  without  success, 
as  all  unbiased  minds  will  conclude. 

If  he  had  adopted  the  ancient  usage  of  the  word  regenera- 
tion, it  might  have  been  bad  for  his  theory,  but  well  for  the 
truth.    On  p.  5,  he  says  : 

"  In  the  early  church  the  word  regeneration  often  expressed, 
not  any  inward  moral  change,  but  an  external  change  of  state 
or  relation."  "This  usage,  in  a  measure,  passed  over  to  the 
Christian  Church.  When  a  man  became  a  member  of  the 
church,  he  was  said  to  be  born  anew,  and  baptism,  which  was 
the  rite  of  initiation,  was  called  regeneration." 

This  is  true  in  part.  But  in  his  life  of  Constantine,  p.  628, 
Eusebius  shows  that  the  Greek  fathers  called  baptism  regenera- 
tion because  it  was  the  teliosis — the  consummating  act  of  the 
new  birth,  the  last  act  of  the  process  called  regeneration. 

The  norm  of  regeneration  was  declared  by  our  Lord  thus : 
"  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot 


2G0         CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PEODUCED^ 

enter  the  kingdom  of  God."  This  language  involves  both  an 
inward  spiritual  change  and  an  outward  change  of  relations.  Is 
it  credible,  therefore,  that  the  early  church  said  of  a  man  who 
had  been  baptized  only  that  he  was  born  again?  Moreover, 
with  the  words  of  Jesus  before  him,  how  dare  any  one  exclude 
baptism  from  the  new  birth  ?  How  can  he  affirm  that  regenera 
tion  is  limited  to  an  inward  spiritual  change  ? 

He  might  have  said,  truly,  that  when,  in  later  times.  Chris- 
tians, falling  into  a  false  doctrine  of  original  sin  and  under  the 
ex  opere  notion  of  baptism,  and  concluding  that  baptism  should 
be  given  to  infants  to  save  them  from  damnation,  did  regard  it 
as  a  sort  of  regeneration.  See  Wesley's  Doctrinal  Tracts,  old 
editions. 

The  mystical  theories  of  regeneration  go  to  pieces  on  John 
3  :  5,  like  ships  upon  a  reef.  If  baptism  is  a  part  of  the  process 
of  regeneration,  and  infants  as  well  as  adults  must  be  regener- 
ated in  order  to  enter  the  kingdom,  it  follows  that  all  unbap- 
tized  infants  and  adults  are  forever  shut  out.  And  if  the  king- 
dom of  G-od  is  equivalent  to  heaven,  then  it  follows  that  all 
unbaptized  adults  and  infants  are  forever  lost.  If,  as  the  creeds 
of  Christendom  and  the  best  interpreters  of  all  j)arties  allow, 
"  born  of  water  "  is  the  equivalent  of  baptism,  then  regeneration 
is  not  complete  without  it,  and  is  not  a  single  act  of  omnipo- 
tence, but  a  process  involving  the  activity  of  the  sinner. 

A  little  attention  to  the  meaning  of  the  phrase,  "  Kingdom  of 
God,"  may  relieve  us  from  these  and  many  other  perplexities. 
The  Church  of  Christ  is  the  last  historic  manifestation  of  the 
kingdom  of  God,  and  is  spoken  of  sometimes  as  the  kingdom. 
See  Matt.  16  :  18,  19.  Now,  if  Jesus  meant  that  a  birth  of  water 
and  of  the  Spirit  is  a  sine  qua  non  to  entrance  into  his  church, 
then  no  question  should  be  raised  as  to  the  ultimate  salvation 
of  infants  or  godly  adults  who  may  not  have  been  baptized. 
This  Scripture  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  question.  It  neither 
affirms  nor  denies  the  entrance  of  anybody  into  the  ultimate 
kingdom  of  glory. 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED?  261 

That  Jesus  did  refer  to  tlie  kingdom  in  time,  and  not  in 
eternity,  is  evident.  John,  Jesus  and  the  apostles  had  every- 
where in  Palestine  preached  that  it  was  near  at  hand.  With 
this  proclamation  stiil  ringing  in  the  public  ear,  it  is  morall}'' 
certain  that  Nicodemus  came  to  Jesus  to  learn  about  the  king- 
dom of  God,  or  the  Church  of  Christ,  just  about  to  be  estab- 
lished. Hence,  what  Jesus  said  about  entrance  into  the 
kingdom  should  be  restricted  to  the  kingdom  in  time,  or  the 
church. 

That  this  is  recognized  by  the  universal  Christian  conscious- 
ness, controversy  aside,  is  shown  by  the  fact  that  almost  all 
Christian  churches  do  now  require  and  have  always  required 
baptism  of  those  who  would  enter.  Even  infants  are  excluded 
unless  baptized.  And  what  is  more  conclusive  is,  that  every 
baptismal  rubric  of  Christendom  bases  the  demand  for  baptism, 
as  the  initiatory  rite,  upon  these  very  words  of  Jesus.  And  at 
the  same  time  the  wisest  theologians  admit  that  when  baptism 
is  morally  or  physically  impossible,  if  the  impossibility  be  not 
self-imposed,  the  want  of  it  may  not  debar  from  the  kingdom  of 
God  in  eternity.  And  further,  that  no  infant  will  be  excluded 
therefrom  for  lack  of  baptism.  We  are,  therefore,  warranted  in 
the  interpretation  now  given.  And  much  special  pleading 
against  baptism  as  a  part  of  the  process  of  conversion  or  regen- 
eration is  forever  set  aside.  We  are  now  prepared  for  a  more 
positive  treatment  of  the  subject. 

Singularly  enough  the  noun  conversion  occurs  but  once  in 
the  Bible.  Paul  and  Barnabas  "  being  brought  on  their  way, 
they  passed  through  Phenice  and  Samaria,  declaring  the  con- 
version of  the  Gentiles."  Acts  15  :  3.  The  term  regeneration  in 
a  kindred  sense  occurs  but  once  in  the  Bible.  Titus  3 :  5.  His- 
torically, at  least,  they  are  interchangeable.  It  would  have 
been  equally  correct  to  write,  declaring  the  regeneration  of  the 
Gentiles,  In  their  conversion  they  were  doubtless  born  of 
water  and  of  the  Spirit. 

The  noun  rendered  conversion  in  this  passage,  denoting  a 


262         CONVERSION— WEAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED^ 

finished  process,  is  from  epistrephein,  which  occurs  in  the  New 
Testament  thirty-nine  times.  In  every  case  but  one,  the  Revised 
Version  renders  it  actively  to  turn,  or  by  an  equivalent.  In  the 
Authorized  Version  it  is  rendered  passively  ten  times,  so  strong 
a  hold  upon  King  James'  revisers  had  the  mystical  theory  of 
passivity  in  conversion.  The  same  verb,  without  the  preposi- 
tion epi,  occurs  eighteen  times.  In  every  case  it  is  active  in  the 
original  and  in  the  R.  V.  The  A.  V.  only  once.  Matt.  17:  3, 
gives  it  passively.  In  thirty-four  out  of  fifty-seven  occurrences 
of  both  forms  a  physical  act  or  process  is  denoted.  In  the  rest 
a  moral  turning  is  indicated. 

By  correct  translation  scholarship  has  swept  away  the  ver- 
bal basis  of 

PASSIVITY  IN  CONVERSION. 

The  verb  sometimes  expresses  conprehensively  this  moral 
turning.  Acts  14:  15.  Sometimes  it  is  joined  with  other  terms, 
which  express  one,  or  more,  constituent  elements  of  the  process, 
and  other  terms  are  added  to  express  the  consequents  :  "  Hear- 
ing the  gospel  a  great  multitude  believed  and  turned  to  the 
Lord."  Acts  11 :  20,  21.  "Repent  ye,  therefore,  and  turn." 
Acts  3  :  19.  Sometimes  the  elements  of  the  process  are  given 
without  the  verb.  Acts  18 :  8.  Comparing  Acts  2  :  38  with  3  : 
19  it  is  evident  that  baptism  is  the  outward  act  by  which  the 
inward  moral  turning  is  manifested,  and  relates  the  sinner  to 
Christ  in  order  to  salvation  from  past  sins.  "Repent  ye,  there- 
fore, and  turn,  that  your  sins  may  be  blotted  out,  that  so  there 
may  come  seasons  of  refreshing  from  the  presence  of  the  Lord.'' 
This  is  equivalent  to,  "Repent  ye  and  be  baptized  every  one  of 
you  in — epi — the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  unto  the  remission  of 
sins,  and  you  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  The 
steps  in  the  process  are  hearing,  believing,  repenting  and  being 
baptized.  The  consequents,  remission  of  sins  and  the  reception 
of  the  Holy  Spirit.    But  the  following  shows  that  the  sinner, 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED?  263 


with  the  gospel  available,  is  responsible  for  every  step  in  the 
process  of  conversion.    That  he  must  be  active  from  the  first : 

"  For  this  people's  heart  is  waxed  gross,  and  their  ears  are 
dull  of  hearing,  and  their  eyes  have  they  closed ;  lest  at  any 
time  they  should  perceive  with  their  eyes,  and  hear  with  their 
ears,  and  should  understand  with  their  hearts,  and  should  turn 
again  and  I  should  heal  them."    Matt.  13:  15. 

The  spiritual  declension  of  the  Jews  was  progressive,  not 
fixed  at  birth.  Their  own  sinful  practices  had  brought  on  heart 
stupidity  and  dullness  of  hearing,  which  was  followed  by  vol- 
untary spiritual  blindness.  Their  moral  perversity,  and  not 
innate  depravity,  which  required  a  miracle  to  remove,  was  the 
obstacle  to  their  moral  turning.  If  anywhere  the  necessity  of  a 
miracle  precedent  to  conversion  should  be  taught,  it  certainly 
should  have  been  taught  in  this  passage,  for  it  stands  related  to 
the  preceding  parable  of  the  sower,  as  a  doctrinal  comment. 
Besides,  the  doctrine  of  the  parable  itself  is  that  faith  depends 
upon  hearing  and  understanding  the  word.  See  Luke  8 :  12. 
The  blame  for  non-conversion  is  plainly  cast  upon  the  Jews 
thus  :  "  Ye  will  not  come  to  me  that  you  might  have  life." 
Hence  Paul's  aphorism  :  "  Faith  cometh  by  hearing,  and  hear- 
ing by  the  word  of  Gfod."  Paul  and  Barnabas  "  so  spake  that 
a  great  multitude  both  of  Jews  and  Greeks  believed."  Miracles 
were  wrought,  but  not  in  sinners  to  enable  them  to  believe.  The 
apostles  "  spoke  boldly  in  the  Lord,  who  gave  testimony  unto 
the  word  of  his  grace,  and  granted  signs  and  wonders  to  be  done 
by  their  hands."  Acts  14 :  3.  By  a  miracle  wrought  on  his 
deputy,  who  sought  to  turn  him  away  from  Paul's  preaching, 
Sergius  Paulus  was  influenced  to  become  a  believer. 

But,  says  the  objector,  did  not  the  Lord  open  Lydia's  heart 
that  she  attended  unto  the  things  spoken  by  Paul?  Acts  16. 
But  how  ?  By  a  miracle  wrought  within  her  ?  The  record  does  not 
say  so.  It  says  nothing  about  a  miracle.  Her  heart  might  have 
been  opened,  as  was  that  of  Sergius  Paulus,  by  a  miracle 
wrought  in  her  presence.    Or  it  might  have  been  done  provi- 


-2Gi  CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED'} 

dentially,  without  a  miracle.  We,  therefore,  protest  against 
the  use  of  this  case  as  an  exception  to  the  rule  of  conversion. 
It  may  be  asserted  then,  without  fear  of  successful  contradic- 
tion, that,  historically,  there  is  not  one  case  of  conversion  where 
miraculous  regeneration  preceded  conversion. 

Failing  to  justify  the  doctrine  by  the  historic  record  mystics 
resort  to  such  scriptures  as  contain  figurative  presentations  of 
the  subject.  But  what  is  a  figure  of  speech?  Lord  Kames 
says,  it  is  "  the  using  a  word  in  a  sense  difierent  from  what  is 
proper  to  it."  Again,  "  a  word  used  figuratively,  or  in  a  new 
sense,  suggests  at  the  same  time  the  sense  it  commonly  bears, 
and  thus  it  has  the  effect  to  present  two  objects  :  one  signified 
by  the  figurative  sense,  which  may  be  termed  the  principal 
object ;  and  the  one  signified  by  the  proper  sense,  which  may 
be  termed  the  accessory." 

In  ordinary  rhetoric  the  use  of  figures  is  for  ornament.  In 
revelation  they  are  used  more  for  instruction,  because  the  pur- 
pose is  to  make  known  "  the  deep  things  of  God" — spiritual 
things,  and  we  must  learn  the  spiritual  by  means  of  the  natural, 
animate  and  inanimate.  Almost  all  words  in  their  first  or 
proper  sense  denote  only  the  natural.  But,  afterwards,  figura- 
tively, become  signs  of  spiritual  ideas.  That  is,  they  are  turned 
from  their  proper  to  a  figurative  signification.  But,  upon  the 
principle  of  analogy  between  the  natural  and  the  spiritual,  there 
can  be  no  figure  without  analogy.  If  a  natural  object  bear  no 
analogy  or  likeness,  in  any  respect,  to  a  given  spiritual  object, 
then  the  word  which  denotes  the  former  cannot  be  used  figura- 
tively to  denote  the  latter,  and  as  there  must  be  similarity  in 
order  to  a  figure,  sameness  or  identity  renders  a  figure  impossi- 
ble. Because,  if  two  objects  are  identical,  one  word  in  the  same 
sense  would  apply  to  both.  The  failure  to  observe  this  self- 
evident  proposition  has  led  Mr.  Drummond  into  error.  His 
book,  "  Natural  Law  in  the  Spiritual  World,"  repeatedly  con- 
founds analogy  with  identity  in  dealing  with  Scriptural  figures. 

No  natural  object  is  an  adequate  image  of  any  given  spirit- 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED^  2G5 


ual  object.  Hence,  to  affirm  of  the  spiritual  everything  that 
may  be  predicated  of  the  natural  because  the  same  word  may 
be  applied  to  both,  but  to  one  properly  and  the  other  figura- 
tively, is  servility  to  a  false  method  of  interpretation,  and  only 
a  theoretical  bias,  or  something  worse,  can  account  for  such  pro- 
cedure. But,  because  of  the  inadequacy  of  any  one  natural 
object  to  image  a  spiritual  one,  revelation  sometimes  affords  us 
an  all-around  conception  by  several  figures,  each  carrying  its 


own  appropriate  analogy.  Hence,  to  form  a  theory  of  conver- 
sion, for  example,  based  upon  one  figure  only,  while  ignoring 
others,  is  gross  violence  to  the  word  of  God.  Therefore,  any 
figures  of  speech  relating  to  any  given  subject,  should  be  inter- 
preted subject  to  mutual  limitations.  No  figure  should  be 
stopped  short  of,  or  pressed  beyond,  its  own  analogy,  No  figure 
should  be  forced  to  usurp  the  place  or  to  do  duty  for  another,  or 
urged  into  conflict  with  any  unfigurative  statement,  or  the  anal- 
ogy of  the  faith.  No  figure  must  be  interpreted  so  as  to  violate 
the  nature  or  attributes  of  its  principal  or  accessory  objects,  or 
so  as  to  involve  an  analogy  between  them  which  does  not  exist. 


2G6         CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED'} 

If  any  of  these  self-evident  principles  shall  be  disregarded,  fig- 
ures may  be  distorted,  obscured  or  put  on  all-fours  to  run  hither 
and  thither  at  the  bidding  of  any  controversialist  more  intent 
upon  victory  than  truth.  The  diagram  shown  on  the  preceding 
page  may  present  to  the  eye  a  fair  induction  and  arrangement 
of  the  Scriptural  figures  related  to  our  subject. 

Observe,  around  the  subject  are  ranged  figures  each  of  which 
elucidates  it  in  part  or  in  whole.  Companion  figures  are  placed 
near  each  other.    Let  us  now  proceed  to  their  examination  : 

"  Of  his  own  will  begat  he  us  with  the  word  of  truth."  Jas. 
1:  18. 

BEGOTTEN. 

This  figure  presents  an  analogy  between  a  natural  and  a 
spiritual  fact.  In  nature  a  new  organism  animated  with  a 
new  life  results.  But,  in  the  spiritual  realm  an  already  exist- 
ent being — a  man — is  begotten.  The  text  helps  to  limit  the 
analogy.  The  man  is  begotten  with  the  word  of  truth.  He  is 
begotten,  not  immediately — without  means — but  mediately, 
through  or  by  means  of  truth.  Therefore,  he  is  begotten  not  by 
"physical"  but  by  moral  power,  Dr.  Hodge  to  the  contrary  not- 
withstanding. Dr.  A.  Barnes,  in  a  note  on  this  passage,  is  more 
correct  than  his  fellow  churchman.  He  says,  "  By  the  instru- 
mentality of  truth.  It  was  not  a  mere  creative  act,  but  it  was 
by  truth  as  the  seed  or  germ.  There  is  no  efi'ect  produced  in 
our  minds  in  regeneration  which  the  truth  is  not  fitted  to  pro- 
duce." 

The  man  is  fitted  with  a  new  moral  life.  His  spiritual  char- 
acter is  changed.  Hence,  although  not  a  new  organism,  he  is  a 
new  moral  being. 

"  Of  his  own  will  begat  he  us."  God  takes  the  initiative  in 
our  salvation.  The  sinner  cannot  beget  himself.  But  he  can 
resist  the  truth,  so  as  not  to  be  begotten.  Hence  we  are  not 
begotten  by  an  irresistible  act  of  God's  power — by  a  miracle. 
See  2  Tim.  3:8;  Acts  7 :  51. 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED'}  267 

Those  who  are  begotten  of  God  are  his  spiritual  children. 
Likewise  all  true  believers.  "  Ye  are  all  the  children  of  God 
by  faith  in  Christ  Jesus."  "But  faith  comes  by  hearing." 
Hence,  Paul  to  the  Corinthians  :  "  For  though  you  have  ten 
thousand  instructors  in  Christ,  yet  have  you  not  many  fathers, 
for  in  Christ  Jesus  I  have  begotten  you  through  tlie  gospel."  1 
Cor.  4:  15.  Or,  they  were  begotten  of  God  through  Paul's 
agency,  by  means  of  preaching  the  gospel,  the  word  of  truth. 

The  highest  evidence  of  the  moral  change  contemplated  is 
love.  "  Seeing  ye  have  purified  your  souls  in  obedience  to  the 
ti'uth  unto  unfeigned  love  of  the  brethren,  love  one  another  from 
the  heart  fervently ;  having  been  begotten  again,  not  of  corrvipt- 
ible  seed,  but  of  incorruptible,  through  the  word  of  God  which 
liveth  and  abideth  forever."  1  Pet.  1:  22,  23.  It  is  plain  that 
the  word  of  God  is  the  medium  through  which  spiritual  life  is 
communicated.  Life  is  germinant  in  divine  truth.  Therefore, 
although  this  figure  is  often  used  by  mystics  to  justify  the 
notion  of  miraculous  regeneration,  it  must  be  evident  that  its 
scriptural  usage  refutes  the  doctrine. 

BOBN  AGAIN. 

In  the  natural  order  one  is  begotten,  then  born.  Hence,  the 
propriety  of  this  companion  figure  which  includes  the  former 
and  goes  beyond  it.  "  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of 
the  Spirit  he  cannot  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  God."  John 
3 :  5  seq.  Every  one,  naturally,  is  born  of  double  parentage. 
Hence,  the  duality  of  parentage  in  the  figure.  Naturally,  birth 
is  not  the  beginning  of  life,  but  the  translation  of  the  living 
being  into  a  new  environment,  where  the  existent  life  may  be 
developed  and  enjoye  1.  It  is  a  change  of  state  or  relations. 
Analogically,  the  same  is  true  of  the  spiritual  birth.  A  man  is 
begotten — a  new  life  is  imparted  by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  the 
truth,  which  involves  an  inward  spiritual  change,  then  he  is 
born  of  water,  or  by  baptism  he  emerges  into  the  kingdom  of 


i;C.S         COyTEBSIOX—WHAT  IS  IT,  AXD  HOW  PBODUCED^ 

God.  That  is.  baptism  as  a  divine  appointment  effects  an  out- 
■ward  change  of  relations.  Therefore,  regeneration  admitted  by 
Dr,  Hodge  and  others  to  be  the  equivalent  of  being  born  again, 
is  not  an  act  of  omnipotence — a  miracle — but  a  moral  process. 
In  perfect  harmony  is  Paul,  Titus  3:5,  "  According  to  his 
(Grod's)  mercy,  he  saved  us  by  the  washing  of  regeneration  and 
the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 

There  can  be  no  doubt,"  says  Dean  Alford,  note  on  John 
S:  5.  On  any  honest  interpretation  of  the  words,  that  to  be 
born  of  water  refers  to  the  token  or  outward  sign  of  baptism,  to 
be  born  of  the  Spirit  to  the  thing  signified,  or  inward  grace  of 
the  Holy  Spirit.  All  attempts  to  get  rid  of  these  two  plain  facts 
have  sprung  from  doctrinal  prejudices,  by  which  the  views  of 
expositors  have  been  warped." 

DEAD,  QUICKEXED,  RAISED. 

"  But  God  who  is  rich  in  mercy  for  his  great  love  wherewith 
he  loved  us,  even  when  we  were  dead  through  our  trespasses, 
quickened  us  together  with  Christ  (by  grace  liave  ye  been 
saved)  and  raised  us  up  with  him  and  made  us  sit  together  in 
heavenly  places  in  Christ  Jesus."  Eph.  2  :  4,  6.  The  sinner  is 
dead.  How  '{  As  Lazarus  in  his  grave  ?  Without  power  of 
thought,  feeling,  will  or  action  ?  Certainly  not.  But  as  the 
union  of  Lazarus  with  the  life-sustaining  natural  environment 
was  severed  and  he  had  no  power  to  restore  himself,  so  the 
sinner's  union  with  God,  the  source  of  spiritual  life,  is  disrupted 
and  he  is  without  power  to  regain  his  lost  estate.  But  God  who 
is  rich  in  mercy  exerts  upon  him  through  the  gospel  the  moral 
power  necessary  to  make  him  alive.  It  should  be  especially 
noted  that  the  text  says.  We  were  dead  through  our  tres- 
passes." not  through  or  by  reason  of  Adam's  sin.  "  And  you 
did  he  quicken,  when  ye  were  dead  through  youi-  trespasses  and 
sins."  V.  1,  R.  T.  They  were  under  the  death  sentence  of  law. 
Under  condemnation.     Morally    dead.    The  law  kills.  The 


CONVEBSION—WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED'}  269 

Spirit  quickens.  See  2  Cor.  3 :  4  seq.  The  letter  here 
stands  for  the  law  as  a  system  of  justification.  The  Spirit 
for  the  gospel,  called  the  faith  —  a  system  of  justification 
by  grace  through  faith.  The  one  was  a  ministration  of  death — 
condemnation.  The  other  a  ministration  of  the  Spirit — of  life. 
Hence,  Paul :  "  Is  the  law  then  against  the  promises  of  God  ? 
God  forbid.  For  if  there  had  been  a  law. given  which  could 
make  alive,  verily  righteousness  would  have  been  of  the  law. 
Howbeit,  the  Scripture  hath  shut  up  all  things  und  r  sin  that 
the  promise  of  life  by  faith  of  Jesus  Christ  might  be  given  to 
them  that  believe."    Gal.  3  :  21,  22. 

Again,  Jesus  said :  "  It  is  the  Spirit  that  quickeneth."  "The 
words  that  I  have  spoken  unto  you,  they  are  Spirit  and  they  are 
life."  It  is  clear  then  that  this  quickening  was  moral,  not 
physical,  and  that  it  was  by  the  gospel,  the  word  of  truth, 
involving  forgiveness  of  sins. 

It  should  be  emphasized  that,  under  the  reign  of  grace, 
whatever  death  was  brought  upon  our  race  through  Adamic  sin 
by  reason  of  his  federal  headship  was  annulled  by  reason  of 
the  federal  headship  of  the  second  Adam.  So  now,  "  every  one 
must  give  account  of  himself  to  God."  Adam's  sin  will  never 
shut  out  one  of  his  children  from  heaven.  Our  own  sins  exhale 
the  atmosphere  of  death.  What,  without  our  will  or  consent, 
we  lost  in  the  first  Adam,  we  have  regained  or  shall  regain  in 
the  second  Adam,  without  our  will  or  consent.  Hence,  infant 
regeneration,  baptism  and  church  membership  are  the  useless 
output  of  the  mine  of  tradition  and  speculation. 

But  to  return.  In  the  natural  order  a  dead  man  should  be 
raised.  Hence,  in  a  figure,  the  dead  sinner  quickened  is  the 
subject  of  a  moral  resurrection  efi'ected  in  baptism.  "  Having 
been  buried  with  him  in  baptism,  wherein  ye  were  also  raised 
with  him  through  faith  in  the  working  of  God  who  raised  him 
from  the  dead.  And  you  being  dead  through  your  trespasses 
and  the  uncircumcision  of  your  flesh,  you,  1  say,  did  he  quicken 


270          CONVEBSIOK—WHAT  IS  IT,  AXD  HOW  PRODUCED f 


togetlier  witli  him,  having  forgiven  us  all  our  trespasses." 
Col.  2  :  12,  13 ;  cf.  Rom.  6  :  2-4. 

Does  one  say  this  is  a  spiritual  resurrection,  therefore,  the 
iDaptism  is  not  necessarily  an  immersion  in  water  ]  Grant  the 
former,  "but  if  baptism  is  the  sign  of  the  thing  signified,  it  must 
be  a  burial  in  and  a  rising  out  of  water.  In  affusion  there  is  no 
such  correspondence  between  the  outer  and  the  inner.  Hence, 
says  Meyer,  note  on  Acts  16  :  "  Immersion  was,  in  fact,  quite 
an  essential  part  of  the  symbolism  of  baptism."  Moreover,  this 
spiritual  resurrection  could  only  occur  by  faith,  hence,  baptism 
without  faith  in  the  subject  of  it,  is  utterly  unknown  to  the 
Scriptures.    Therefore,  infant  baptism  is  a  solecism. 

In  baptism  believers,  quickened  sinners,  arise  to  walk  in  a 
new  life — in  a  new  moral  environment.  It  is  plain  that  the  last 
two  figures  are  rhetorical  equivalents  of  being  begotten  of  the 
Spirit  and  born  of  water.  Yet  they  should  be  discriminated, 
for  many  Scriptures  involve  one  or  the  other  as  the  aim  of 
speaker  or  writer  requires. 

NEW  CBEATIOX. 

"  Wherefore,  if  any  man  is  in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature  : 
old  things  are  passed  away ;  behold,  they  are  become  new." 
2  Cor.  5:  17;  R.  V.  Between  the  original  creation  of  man  and 
his  new  creation  there  is  an  analogy,  else  the  term  creation  is 
not  used  here  figuratively  but  literally.  But  if  analogous  they 
must  not  be  regarded  as  identical.  Grenerally  mystics  reason 
thus :  Man  was  originally  created  by  miracle,  therefore,  his  new 
creation  is  by  a  miracle.  If  the  two  creations  are  simply  anal- 
o"-ous  and  not  identical,  as  all  eminent  wTiters  declare,  then  the 
conclusion  is  unwarranted,  and  the  figure  does  not  sustain  the 
doctrine  of  miraculous  regeneration. 

Now  before  man  was  created  there  was  no  man.  There  was 
no  consciousness  or  moral  experience.  The  creation  of  man 
was  through  physical  power  as  opposed  to  moral.    In  his  crea- 


CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED'}  271 


tion  all  his  faculties  were  so  formed  and  adjusted  that  their 
functional  activity  harmonized  with  the  will  of  his  Maker. 
Hence,  the  appearance  of  God's  moral  image  in  man.  Before 
the  new  creation  there  is  a  man.  He  had  a  prior  consciousness 
and  moral  experience.  The  re-oreation  is  bj  moral  power,  for 
it  is  a  moral  effect.  Hence,  the  reappearance  of  God's  moral 
image.  But  for  the  moral  suasion  of  Satan  seducing  man  from 
loyalty,  the  moral  image  of  God  in  him  had  not  been  lost  or 
obscured  by  the  degrading  power  of  sin.  In  the  new  creation 
the  moral  image  of  God  is  restored  by  the  restoration  of  his 
faculties  to  their  normal,  functional  activity  by  means  of  the 
moral  power  of  a  higher  knowledge  of  truth,  "  For  though  we 
have  known  Christ  according  to  the  flesh,  yet  now  henceforth 
know  we  him  no  more,"  after  the  flesh. 

Kata  sarka,  after  the  flesh — is  the  unregenerate  man's 
standard  of  knowledge.  The  flesh  dominates  the  spirit.  The 
corporal  instincts,  propensities,  appetites  and  passions,  char- 
acterize him.  He  minds  carnal  things,  and  as  he  was  brought 
into  this  condition  by  moral  suasion,  so  moral  suasion  through 
spiritual  knowledge — the  word  of  truth — may  reverse  the  pre- 
ternatural order,  that  he  shall  be  morally  a  new  creature.  But, 
as  he  was  active  in  his  degeneration,  so  he  must  be  active  in 
regeneration.  Hence  the  propriety  of  Paul's  language  :  "  Lie 
not  one  to  another,  seeing  ye  have  put  off  the  old  man  with  his 
doings,  and  have  put  on  the  new  man,  which  is  renewed  in 
knowledge  after  the  image  of  him  that  created  him."  Col.  3  :  9, 
10  ;  cf.  Eph.  4  :  22-25. 

Now,  since  in  this  creation,  or  change  of  moral  personality —  . 
moral  manhood — Christians  are  represented  as  having  had  an 
active  agency,  it  is  certain  that  the  re-creation  is  not  effected  by 
miracles  which  would  nullify  that  agency.  But  the  theory  we 
combat  does,  "  and  is  intended  "  to  do  this,  hence,  it  is  false 
and  unscriptural.  Besides,  it  robs  the  sinner  of  moral  responsi- 
bility. It  makes  him  incapable  of  turning  to  God  after  His 
grace  has  removed  all  obstacles  to  salvation  on  the  divine  side. 


272  CONVERSIOX—WnAT  IS  IT,  AXD  HOW  FRODUCED'i 

and  has  made  the  sinner  a  subject  of  the  divine  energy  in  the 
word  of  truth.  Hence,  we  may  fairly  conclude  that  the  Chris- 
tian is  a  new  creature  because  of  his  changed  moral  personality, 
in  wliich  the  image  of  God  reappears,  and  this  change  is  effected 
by  the  Holy  Spirit  through  the  truth.  God  is  the  efficient  cause 
of  the  change  while  the  sinner  is  co-operant.  Hence,  says  Paul, 
"  I  am  not  ashamed  of  the  gospel  of  Christ,  for  it  is  the  power 
of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that  believeth." 

Here,  then,  again,  we  find  another  rhetorical  equivalent  for 
regeneration  or  the  new  birth.  It  is  the  finished  product — the 
man  in  Christ,  the  Christian — who  is  a  new  creation.  But,  in 
none  of  the  figures  passed  under  review,  is  the  miraculous 
theory  of  regeneration  affirmed,  under  a  fair  interpretation. 
The  remaining  figures  of  the  circle, 

ADOPTION,  NATTTBALIZATIOX,  TRANSLATION, 

are  generally  conceded  to  be  against  the  theory,  involving  as 
they  do  the  whole  process  of  conversion,  and  the  sinner's 
activity  in  it.  We  feel  in  view  of  what  has  been  said,  fully 
justified  in  holding  fast  the  proposition  with  which  we  set  out. 
Conversion  or  regeneration  involves  a  change  from  unbelief  to 
faith  in  Christ ;  a  change  of  the  affections  from  the  love  of  sin  to 
the  love  of  righteousness ;  a  change  of  will,  or  repentance, 
involving  godly  sorrow  for  sins  and  issuing  in  a  reformation  of 
life.  See  2  Cor.  7:  8-11,  E,.  Y.  Afterwards  a  change  of  rela- 
tion through  baptism  as  the  divinely  appointed  means.  Thus 
is  conversion  consummated.  Then  the  convert  can  by  faith 
appropriate  the  promise  for  remission  of  past  sins,  and  the  gift 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  rejoicing  in  Christ. 

HOW  IS  CONVERSION  PRODUCED'} 

After  what  has  been  said,  but  little  need  be  added.  God  is 
the  efficient  cause,  the  Holy  Spirit  is  the  divine  agent,  and 


CONVEBSION—WEAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PRODUCED'^  273 


divine  truth  the  means  or  instrument.  "  It  pleased  God  Tby  the 
foolishness  of  preaching  to  save  them  that  believe."  This  is 
the  ordinary  method.  The  gospel  should  be  the  matter  of 
preaching.  It  was  originally  revealed  by  the  Holy  Spirit  and 
formulated  on  the  lips  of  inspired  men,  then  committed  to  rec- 
ord that  all  subsequent  preachers  might  be  sure  of  it.  One 
may  object  that  this  method  discards  the  present  agency  of  the 
Spirit ;  that  it  is  reliance  upon  the  dead  letter.  The  underlying 
thought  of  this  objection  is  that  the  written  word  is  only  so 
much  dead  printer's  ink.  But  we  do  not  so  conceive  it.  Divine 
facts,  thoughts  and  ideas  are  stored  in  the  Word  of  Truth,  and 
from  it  are  conveyed  into  the  mind  by  reading  or  hearing.  It  is 
charged  with  spiritual  power.  "  Is  not  my  word  like  as  a  fire  ? 
saith  the  Lord ;  and  like  a  hammer  that  breaketli  the  rock  in 
pieces?"  "The  word  of  God  is  living  and  active,  and  sharper 
than  any  two-edged  sword,  and  piercing  even  to  the  dividing 
of  soul  and  spirit,  of  both  joints  and  marrow,  and  quick  to 
discern  the  thoughts  and  intents  of  the  heart."  Or,  as  Albert 
Barnes  truly  says  :  "  There  is  no  effect  produced  in  regenera- 
tion which  the  truth  is  not  fitted  to  produce,  and  the  agency  of 
God  in  the  case  is  to  secure  its  fair  and  full  influence  on  the 
soul." 

But  how  ?  We  answer,  not  by  a  miracle  wrought  in  the  sin- 
ner to  control  or  coerce  his  will,  but  providentially,  by  many 
agencies  and  instrumentalities  reinforcing  the  truth.  The  Spirit 
dwells  in  all  Christians — a  living  ministry  included — to  sanctify 
them  by  the  truth  and  to  energize  all  their  faculties  in  preach- 
ing and  teaching  the  truth.  Barnabas  "  was  a  man  full  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  faith  and  much  peoj^le  was  added  to  the  Lord." 
A  personal  embodiment  of  truth  in  the  lives  of  Christians,  gives 
it  a  miglity  winning  power.  1  Pet.  3 :  1.  The  church  in  its 
organic  history  and  ceaseless  activity  presses  it  upon  the  atten- 
tion of  the  world,  and  if  it  were  united  as  the  Savior  prayed, 
the  world  would  believe  that  he  was  sent  of  God.  Social  cus- 
toms, civil  laws  and  institutions  are  colored  by  it.  Universal 

18 


274         CONVERSION— WHAT  IS  IT,  AND  HOW  PBODUCED'} 

literature  more  or  less  absorbs  aud  bears  it  silently  into  the 
thoughts  of  all  men. 

Revealed  thought  floats  upon  and  mingles  with  the  stream  of 

TLADITION. 

Much  of  divine  truth  has  found  lodgment  in  the  minds  of 
men  who  never  saw  or  read  a  Bible.  The  Spirit  in  ten  thousand 
ways  may  operate  on  human  minds  through  the  truth  thus 
widely  disseminated  in  the  absence  of  a  printed  Bible.  But 
experience  demonstrates  that  spiritual  effects  are  always  pro- 
portioned to  the  quantum  of  divine  truth  possessed.  Hence  the 
whole  Bible  should  be  given  to  all,  and  the  living  ministry 
along  with  it.  None  should  be  so  rash  as  to  deny  that  the 
Holy  Spirit  may  by  direct  or  indirect  suggestion  fix  the  sinner's 
attention  upon  the  truth  in  order  to  his  conversion,  so  long  as  it 
is  declared  in  the  Scriptures  that  the  evil  spirit  now  works  in 
the  children  of  disobedience.  Eph.  2  :  2.  But  it  is  equally  rash 
to  say  that  without  the  truth  the  Holy  Spirit  regenerates  by  a 
miracle.  Miracles  were  never  intended  for  this  end,  but  to 
arrest  attention  and  fix  it  upon  the  word  of  truth  which  they 
attested,  so  that  its  power  to  regenerate  might  be  realized.  The 
truth,  in  one  or  another  form,  usually  as  formulated  in  the  gos- 
pel, is  the  medium  through  which  the  Spirit  begets,  quickens, 
renews,  recreates  or  regenerates  the  sinner.  He  who  believes 
in  Christ  through  the  gospel,  repents,  and  is  baptized  in  his 
name,  is  a  Christian  and  entitled  to  his  promises,  and  if  faith- 
ful unto  death,  his  shall  be  the  crown  of  life.  Amen. 


"VVii.LiA.n  KiMBROL'GH  Pexdleton-  was  born  in  Louisa  county,  Virginia, 
Septeiuber  8,  1817.  He  was  educated  at  the  University  of  Virginia,  wliere 
he  completed  an  elective  course  in  classical,  scieutitic  and  philosophical 
studies,  and  was  also  graduated  from  the  law  school.  In  1«4U  he  was 
admitted  to  the  bar,  but  soon  after,  in  1841,  having  married  a  daughter  of 
Alexander  Campbell,  he  removed  to  liethany  to  take  part  in  the  founding 
and  sustaining  of  Bethany  College.  He  Avas  at  tirst  Professor  of  jS'atural 
Philosophy  and  Astronomy,  but  later  was  appointeil  to  the  departments  of 
Moral  Science  and  Bclles-Leltres  and  divided  with  Professor  Loos  the  classes 
of  the  ^linisterial  course. 

After  the  burning  of  the  first  college  building  in  1857,  he  accompanied 
Alexander  Campbell  througii  the  "West  and  South,  soliciting  funds  tor  the 
erection  of  the  present  building.  He  had  been  lor  some  years  vice-prcsitlent. 
On  the  death  of  Alexantler  Campbell,  in  IbGii,  he  became  presidi-nt,  anil  dur- 
ing the  many  years  of  financial  distress,  dating  from  tiie  Ci\il  War,  which 
crippled  the  work  to  which  he  was  ilevoted,  he  also  filled  the  Liluirious  and 
difficult  ortice  of  treasurer.  He  was  associate  editor  of  the  ililh  iniiul,  liar- 
biiKjcr  from  its  beginning,  and  was  for  some  years  associalcd  in  the  editor- 
ship of  the  Vhrisl (iDi  Sini/i/anl.  A\uk\  tliese  labors  lie  found  time  for  much 
preaching,  for  much  trax  eliiig,  and  a  large  correspondence  in  the  interests 
both  of  the  college  ami  of  thecliurcli;  to  prepare  and  deli\  er  addresses  in 
behalf  of  almost  every  public  interest,  and  to  give  the  aid  of  practical  talents 
and  untiring  energy  to  every  plan  for  public  improvement  in  his  vicinity. 

In  iJS.ju,  he  was  a  candidate  for  membership  in  the  Virginia  Constitu- 
tional Convention  of  that  year,  and  canvassed  the  district  in  company  with 
the  other  candidates;  and  in  1855,  he  accepted  the  congressional  nomination 
of  the  ivnow-Xotliing  organization,  with  the  uuderslanding  that  the  princi- 
ples of  the  party  were  to  be  oiienly  discussed.  He  made  the  canvass  single- 
handed  against  such  opponents  as  Henry  A.  "Wise,  JSlason,  McComas,  and 
otiier  eminent  Eastern  Virginia  orators.  Although  defeated,  he  succeeded  in 
cutting  down  a  previous  majority  of  his  opponent  from  about  4,500  to  less 
than  1,200  votes. 

In  1872,  he  was  sent  by  the  Democratic  and  Pepublican  Conventions  as 
senatorial  representative  to  the  West  Virginia  Constitutional  Convention. 
He  was  a  member  of  the  Committees  on  Finance  and  Education,  but  liis 
speeches  show  an  active  part  in  the  discussion  of  almost  every  question.  In 
187;J,  he  was  appointed  by  the  governor  to  fill  the  last  two  months  of  the 
term  as  State  Superintendent  of  i'ublic  Schools,  in  place  of  Hon.  C.  S. 
Lewis,  resigned.  During  this  time  he  not  only  made  tiie  report  of  the 
department,  but,  in  co-operation  with  Hon.  A.  A.  Lewis,  framed  the  school 
law,  which  was  adopteil  v.ithout  change  by  the  Legislature. 

In  187(5,  as  a  residt  of  a  movement  begun  by  the  teachers  of  the  State, 
he  was  elected  superintendent  for  the  term  of  lour  years.  During  this 
period,  he  gave  to  the  labor  of  reducing  to  method  the  practical  workings  of 
a  school  system  that  he  found  in  the  imperfect  order  natural  to  its  begin- 
nings, every  moment  that  could  be  taken  from  the  occupations  of  an  already 
so  busy  life.  The  degree  of  Doctor  of  Laws  was  conferred  upon  him  by  the 
University  of  Pennsylvania. 

Dr.  Pendleton  has  been  thrice  married,  in  1840  to  Lavinia  M. ,  and  in 
1847  to  Clarinda,  both  daughters  of  Alexander  Campbell,  and  in  1855  to 
Catherine  H.,  daughter  of  Judge  L.  Iving,  of  Warren,  Ohio.  In  1887,  retir- 
ing from  active  service  in  Peliiany  College,  he  removed  with  his  wife  and 
younger  children  toEustis,  Lake  c<niiity,  Florida,  where  he  now  resides. 


\V.  K.  1"ENDLKT()N 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 


W.  K.  PENDLETON,  LL.  D. 

When  Paul,  "having  passed  through  the  upper  coasts,  came 
to  Ejihesus,"  he  found  certain  disciples  there  to  whom  he  said, 
"  Have  ye  received  the  Holy  Spirit,  since  ye  believed  ?"  And 
they  answered,  "  We  have  not  so  much  as  heard  whether  there 
be  any  Holy  Spirit."  (Acts  19:  1-3.)  The  question  and  the 
answer  are  significant ;  the  question,  of  the  essential  relation 
of  the  Spirit  to  the  new  life  in  Christ  and  to  a  real  entrance  into 
the  blessings  of  that  kingdom  which  has  its  seat  and  dominion 
in  the  hearts  of  its  citizens  ;  and  the  answer,  of  the  newness  of 
this  revelation  in  the  progressive  unfolding  of  the  scheme  of 
redemption  and  the  successive  ministries  and  ministrations  in 
its  development.  Paul  emphasizes  the  fact,  not  only  that  there 
is  a  Holy  Spirit,  but  that,  in  the  new  reign,  it  is  given  of  the 
Father  and  must  be  received  by  his  children. 

The  ignorance  of  these  Ephesian  disciples  of  this  central 
truth  in  the  new  reign,  "  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven,"  the  nearness 
of  whose  coming  was  a  startling  feature  in  the  proclamation 
of  the  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist,  was  not  strange,  because 
during  that  ministry  it  had  not  been  clearly  made  known.  The 
apostles  themselves  had  not  understood  it.  When  our  Savior 
announced  to  them  that  he  was  about  to  leave  them  and  go  to 
the  Father,  they  were  filled  with  sorrow,  feeling  that  they  would 
be  left  alone,  without  the  guidance  of  his  wisdom,  the  support 
of  his  power,  the  comfort  and  consolation  of  his  sympathy  and 
love.  Like  these  disciples,  they  did  not  understand  that  the 
ministry  of  Christ  was  to  be  succeeded  by  the  ministry  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  They  could  not  therefore  see  how  it  could  be 
expedient  for  them  that  Christ  should  go  away  and  leave  them. 

275 


276 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 


Even  liis  clear  announcement  of  the  fact  that  in  his  stead, 
the  Father  would  "  send  them  another  Comforter,"  "  the  Spirit 
of  truth,"  "  the  Holy  Spirit ;"  who  should  abide  with  them 
forever;  who  should  enable  them  to  do  works  even  greater 
than  those  they  had  seen  him  do ;  and  who  should  "  guide 
them  into  all  truth,"  "  teach  them  all  things  and  bring  to  their 
remembrance  all  that  he  had  said  unto  them ;"  even  these 
explicit  promises,  enforced  with  all  the  tenderness  of  a  final 
parting  and  the  emphasis  of  a  parting  bequest,  more  enriching 
and  fuller  of  blessing  than  his  continued  personal  presence 
among  them, — all  this  seemed  but  as  vapid  words,  unreal,  pow- 
erless, comfortless  and  incomprehensible.  "  What  is  this,"  they 
exclaimed  in  blind  bewilderment,  "that  he  saith  unto  us,  A 
little  while  and  you  behold  me  not ;  and  again  a  little  while, 
and  ye  shall  see  me ;  and,  because  I  go  to  the  Father  ?  What 
is  this  that  he  saith,  A  little  while  ?    We  know  not  what  he 
saith."    Under  the  impending  shadow  of  a  great  bereavement, 
about  to  fall  upon  them  in  the  loss  of  their  divine  helper  and 
friend,  they  could  see  nothing  but  desertion  and  disaster. 
They  had  forsaken  all  and  followed  him,  and  to  whom,  now, 
should  they  go  ?    This  new  friend,  whom  the  Father  would  send 
them !  they  did  not  even  speculate  about  him,  could  not,  per- 
haps in  their  deep  sorrow,  believe  that  he  could  bring  into  their 
hearts  any  joy.    Practically,  the  promises  of  "the  comforter," 
brought  no  comfort.    Soon  after,  when  the  shepherd  was  smit- 
ten, and  the  sheep  left  without  a  shepherd,  they  were  scattered, 
and  went  back  to  their  old  pursuit  of  fishing.  Was  this  natural  ? 
I  think  so.    The  comfort,  the  confidence  they  had  felt  in  the 
Savior  were  connected  with  his  personal  presence.    His  agency 
was  sensuously  apprehended.    Though  there  was  supernatural 
power  in  it,  words  were  spoken,  the  hand  was  stretched  forth, 
the  subject  of  divine  aid  was  visibly  touched  by  the  divine 
agent,  the  ordinary  sensible  connection  between  cause  and 
effect,  was  seen ;  and  this,  they  thought,  they  could  understand. 
Invisible  power  became  visible,  through  the  personal  and  visi- 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  277 


ble  agent  wlio  exerted  it.  But  remove  the  personal  agent,  can 
there  be  any  power  without  him  ?  How  hard  it  is  to  give  an 
unfaltering  "yes,"  to  this.  It  was  natural  for  Mary  to  cry,  in 
the  deep  desolation  of  what  she  thought  an  eternal  bereave- 
ment, "  Lord,  if  thou  hadst  been  here,  our  brother  had  not  died" 
(John  11 :  32). 

This  new  experience  of  a  Comforter,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  the 
Holy  Spirit,  given  to  abide  in  the  heart,  to  be  a  guest  forever, 
working  with  divine  energy  within  us,  with  no  visible  or  sensi- 
ble presence  to  establish  the  ordinary  connection  of  agent  and 
act,  cause  and  effect,  how  unreal  all  this  seemed  to  the  disciples 
even  when  promised  by  the  Savior's  own  lips,  with  all  the  earn 
est,  comforting  tenderness  of  a  last  and  long  farewell !  Is  it  not 
still  hard  for  us  to  rise  out  of  this  limiting  power  of  our  sensu- 
ousness,  to  the  abstraction  of  a  pure  spiritual  apprehension? 
Are  there  not  many  who  still  say,  We  cannot  understand  how 
there  can  be  any  Holy  Spirit  ? 

Now  because  this  is  the  very  difficulty  which  Paul  found  in 
the  way  of  the  Ephesian  disciples,  the  ignorance  which  he  so 
dogmatically  corrected,  the  defect  in  their  faith,  which  he 
deemed  it  so  important  to  supply  at  the  very  threshold  of  their 
admission  into  the  church,  and  because  it  is  still  the  tendency 
of  the  "  natural  man,"  the  sensuous  nature,  to  raise  it  and  to 
stumble  at  it,  therefore  it  is  important  that  it  should  be  dis- 
cussed and  settled  in  the  light  of  the  Scriptures. 

I  do  not  propose  to  discuss  this  question  as  an  abstraction. 
Revelation  is  practical,  not  philosophical.  It  is  so,  both  in 
nature  and  religion.  The  real  is  the  product  of  forces  that  are 
hidden  behind  their  effects.  The  forces  are  assumed,  not 
inferred,  in  the  method  of  revelation.  It  does  not,  "  in  the 
beginning,"  discuss  the  existence,  the  being  or  the  nature  of  God, 
but  assuming  these,  narrates  what  "  in  the  beginning,"  he  cre- 
ated, and  how,  in  the  development  of  his  purposes,  he  proceeds. 
This  is  the  practical  method  of  revelation.  Creation  and  provi- 
dence are  both  referred  to  God,  without  controversy.  Contro- 


278  THE  DOCTBIXE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 


versy  on  this  subject  is  rebellion.  It  is  the  primal  sin,  the 
source  and  crime  of  all  discord. 

Do  the  Scriptures,  then,  affirm  the  reality  of  a  personal 
agency  in  the  present  ministry  of  the  Kingdom  of  Christ,  or  do 
they  not?  Out  of  their  announcements  can  we  hear,  do  we 
hear,  that  there  is  a  Holy  Spirit,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  given 
and  sent  of  the  Father  and  the  Son,  to  be  the  Divine  Comforter, 
Helper,  Advocate,  in  this  great  controversy,  and  work  of  our 
redemption  ?    To  this  question  we  give  an  emphatic.  Yes. 

First.  There  is  a  prophetic  promise  of  this  purpose  of  the 
Father,  given  through  Joel  and  specially  applied  by  Peter  to 
the  great  outpouring  of  the  Sj)irit  on  the  day  of  Pentecost. 
"And  it  shall  be  in  the  last  days  (the  last  days  of  that  dispen- 
sation) saith  God,  I  will  pour  forth  of  my  Spirit  upon  all  flesh ; 
and  your  sons  and  your  daughters  shall  prophesy,  and  your 
young  men  shall  see  visions.  And  your  old  men  shall  dream 
dreams  ;  yea,  and  on  my  servants  and  on  my  handmaidens  in 
those  days  will  I  pour  forth  my  Spirit ;  and  they  shall  prophesy. 
And  I  will  show  wonders  in  the  heaven  above,  and  signs  on  the 
earth  beneath ;  blood  and  fire  and  vapor  of  smoke.  The  sun 
shall  be  turned  into  darkness,  and  the  moon  into  blood,  before 
the  day  of  the  Lord  come,  that  great  and  notable  day  ;  and  it 
shall  be,  that  whosoever  shall  call  on  the  name  of  the  Lord 
shall  be  saved."    (Joel  2  :  28-31 ;  Acts  2  :  17  21.) 

Thus,  for  more  than  eight  hundred  years,  this  declaration  of 
the  then  far  ofi"  purpose  of  God,  had  been  read  by  the  Jews  with 
no  adequate  understanding  of  its  meaning,  and,  now,  that  it 
was  practically  fulfilled  in  the  pouring  forth  of  the  Spirit  on  the 
day  of  Pentecost,  the  j^eople  still  saw  no  application  of  it,  till 
the  inspired  discernment  of  the  apostles  interpreted  it.  So  dull 
are  we  to  the  new  lights  that  break  upon  us  in  the  great  unfold- 
ings  of  the  Father's  good  purpose  concerning  us ! 

Second.  In  the  ministry  of  John  the  Baptist,  this  promise  is 
referred  to  as  the  baptism  with  (in)  the  Holy  Spirit.  He  was 
himself  prophetically  indicated  as  only  a  Harbinger,  a  voice  in 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNINO  THE  HOLY  SPIBIT.  279 

the  wilderness  sent  to  prepare  the  way  for  another  greater  than 
himself.  As  it  is  written  in  Isaiah  the  prophet,  "Behold,  I  send 
my  messenger  before  thy  face,  who  shall  prepare  thy  way  ;  the 
voice  of  one  crying  in  the  wilderness,  make  ready  the  way  of 
the  Lord,  make  his  paths  straight."  This  John  clearly  declares 
in  his  preaching,  saying,  "  There  cometh  after  me  he  that  is 
^,  mightier  than  I,  the  latchet  of  whose  shoes  I  am  not  worthy  to 
stoop  down  and  unloose.  I  baptize  with  (in)  water;  but  he 
shall  baptize  you  with  (in)  the  Holy  Spirit."  (Mark  1 :  7, 
8.)  Again,  in  the  first  chapter  of  Acts,  we  find  the  prom- 
ised gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit  by  the  Father  and  this  baptism 
with  (in)  the  Holy  Spirit  preached  by  John,  recognized  by  the 
Savior  as  the  same.  Being  assembled  together  with  his  apos- 
tles after  his  resurrection,  he  charged  them  not  to  depart  from 
Jerusalem,  but  to  wait  for  the  promise  of  the  Father,  which, 
saith  he,  ye  heard  from  me ;  "for  John  indeed  baptized  with  (in) 
water;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with  (in)  the  Holy  Spirit  not 
many  days  hence;"  clearly  referring  to  the  ever  memorable 
miracle  of  the  succeeding  Pentecost. 

TJiird.  Our  Savior,  on  a  suggestive  occasion,  early  in  his 
own  brief  ministry,  speaks  of  it.  On  the  last  great  day  of  the 
feast  of  tabernacles,  a  day  of  special  services  of  sacrifices  and 
songs,  at  the  moment  of  morning  sacrifice,  perhaps,  when  a 
priest  brought  water  in  a  golden  pitcher  from  the  spring  of 
Siloam,  and  poured  it  forth,  together  with  wine,  on  the  west  side 
of  the  altar  into  two  perforated  vessels,  amidst  hymns  of  praise 
and  music  ;  when,  perhaps,  in  their  excellent  joy,  they  had  just 
ended  the  special  praise  for  this  symbolic  "  libation  "  as  given 
by  Isaiah,  "  Behold,  God  is  my  salvation  ;  I  will  trust  and  will 
not  be  afraid  ;  for  the  Lord  Jehovah  is  my  strength  and  song ; 
and  he  is  become  my  salvation.  Therefore  with  joy  shall  ye 
draw  water  out  of  the  wells  of  salvation"  (Is.  12 :  2,  3.) — at 
this  moment  the  Savior,  elated  with  the  common  joy  of  the  peo- 
ple and  feeling  in  himself  the  source  and  power  of  its  fulfill- 
ment, stood  and  cried,  saying,  "  If  any  man  thirst  let  him  come 


280  THE  DOCTEINE  CONCEENINO  THE  HOLY  SPIBIT. 

unto  me  and  drink.  He  that  believeth  on  me,  as  the  Scripture 
hath  said,  out  of  his  belly  shall  flow  rivers  of  living  water. 
And  this,"  adds  John  in  explanation,  "spake  he  of  the  Spirit 
which  they  that  believed  on  him  were  to  receive ;  for  the  Spirit 
was  not  yet  given;  because  Jesus  was  not  yet  glorilied."  John 
7:37-39.  Here  we  note  three  distinct  facts  :  (1)  The  Spirit  in 
the  sense  in  which  it  relates  to  the  new  Kingdom  was  not  yet 
given ;  (2)  "  It  was  to  be  received,"  that  is  according  to  the 
divine  purpose  and  promise,  "by  them  that  believed  on  him;" 
and,  (3)  Its  delay  was  for  the  reason  that  Jesus  had  not  yet  been 
glorified.  For  the  present  we  note  only  the  facts.  We  can  do 
so,  perhaps,  with  greater  intelligence  as  to  their  significance, 
than  did  the  disciples  who  heard  him ;  because  we  see  them  in 
the  clear  light  of  subsequent  developments.  John's  explana- 
tion, doubtless,  was  derived  from  what  he  afterwards  witnessed 
and  experienced.  So  always  is  it  with  prophecies.  The  fulfill- 
ment fnakes  them  plain. 

Fourth.  Again,  when  the  Savior's  ministry  was  drawing  to 
its  close,  he  emphasizes  this  promise  by  several  repetitions. 
When  he  had  troubled  their  hearts  by  the  announcement  of  his 
approaching  departure  from  them,  he  said,  "If  ye  love  me,  ye 
will  keep  my  commandments.  And  I  will  pray  the  Father,  and 
he  shall  give  you  another  Comforter,  that  he  may  be  with  you 
forever,  even  the  Spirit  of  truth,  whom  the  world  cannot  receive, 
for  it  beholdeth  him  not,  neither  knoweth  him  ;  ye  know  him ; 
for  he  abideth  with  you  and  shall  be  in  you.  I  will  not  leave 
you  desolate  or  orphans."    ^  "These  things  have  I 

spoken  unto  you  while  yet  abiding  with  you.  But  the  Com- 
forter, even  the  Holy  Spirit  whom  the  Father  will  send  in  my 
name,  he  shall  teach  you  all  things  and  bring  to  your  remem- 
brance all  that  I  said  unto  you."  *  *  "When  the  Com- 
forter is  come,  whom  I  will  send  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even 
the  Spirit  of  truth,  which  proceedeth  from  the  Father,  he  shall 
bear  witness  of  me  ;  and  ye  also  shall  bear  witness,  because  ye 
have  been  with  me  from  the  beginning."    *    *    *    "  Because  I 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  281 

have  spoken  these  things  unto  you,"  told  you  of  my  departure 
and  of  the  persecution  which  shall  befall  you  because  of  your 
faith  in  me,  "  sorrow  hath  filled  your  hearts.  Nevertheless  I 
tell  you  the  truth ;  it  is  expedient  for  you  that  I  go  away ;  for  if 
I  go  not  away,  the  Comforter  will  not  come  unto  you ;  but  if  I 
go,  I  will  send  him  unto  you.  And  he,  when  he  is  come,  will 
convict  the  world  in  respect  of  sin,  and  of  righteousness,  and  of 
judgment;  of  sin,  because  they  believed  not  on  me;  of  right- 
eousness, because  I  go  to  the  Father,  and  ye  shall  behold  me  no 
more  ;  of  judgment,  because  the  prince  of  this  world  hath  been 
judged.  I  have  many  things  to  say  unto  you,  but  you  cannot 
bear  them  now.  Howbeit,  when  he,  the  Spirit  of  truth,  is  come, 
he  shall  guide  you  into  all  the  truth ;  for  he  shall  not  speak 
from  himself;  but  what  things  soever  he  shall  hear,  these  shall 
he  speak ;  and  he  shall  declare  unto  you  the  things  that  are  to 
come."    (John  14,  15,  16). 

I  have  quoted  these  frequent  assertions  of  the  same  promise, 
because  the  Savior  felt  it  needful  and  good  to  do  so,  and  because 
we  cannot  too  frequently  impress  them  upon  our  minds  and 
hearts.  They  lie  at  the  foundation  of  our  faith ;  bring  to  us 
the  assurance  of  our  adoption  ;  and  reveal  the  secret  spring  and 
fountain  of  our  life  in  Christ,  for  "•  without  his  Spirit,  we  are 
none  of  his."    (Rom.  8 :  9). 

Fifth.  Not  only  was  this  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit  thus 
constantly  impressed  upon  the  disciples  and  with  this  increas- 
ing emphasis  as  Jesus  approached  his  crucifixion ;  but  after  his 
resurrection,  and  just  before  his  ascension,  he  recalls  all  he  had 
previously  said  concerning  it,  and  now,  with  chronological  pre- 
cision, renews  it,  and  bids  them  tarry  at  Jerusalem  till  they 
should  receive  it.  "  Behold  I  send  forth  the  promise  of  my 
Father  upon  you ;  but  tarry  ye  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem  until  ye 
be  clothed  with  power  from  on  high."  (Luke  24  :  29).  Accord- 
ingly, when  the  day  of  Pentecost  was  come,  they  were  all 
together  in  one  place,  about  a  hundred  and  twenty,  including 
the  twelve  apostles,  "when  suddenly  there  came  from  heaven  a 


282  THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 

sound  as  of  tlie  rushing  of  a  mighty  wind,  and  it  filled  all  tlie 
house  where  they  were  sitting.  And  there  appeared  unto  them 
tongues  parting  asunder,  like  as  of  fire,  and  it  sat  upon  each 
one  of  them,  and  they  were  all  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  and 
began  to  speak  with  other  tongues  as  the  Spirit  gave  them 
utterance." 

Thus  was  fulfilled  this  long  cherished  promise. 

Like  the  birth  of  Jesus  it  is  signalized  by  preternatural 
signs.  The  angel  speaking  to  the  shepherds  abiding  in  the 
field,  and  the  loud  anthem  of  the  multitude  of  the  heavenly 
host  praising  God,  at  the  birth  of  Jesus,  is  paralleled  by  the 
mighty  rushing  sound,  the  appearance  of  tongues  as  of  fire,  in 
the  outpouring  of  the  Spirit,  and  the  accompanying  power  of 
speaking  in  the  many  languages  of  the  many  nations  compris- 
ing the  vast  audience,  so  that  the  people,  summoned  by  the 
startling  sound,  are  frantically  eager  to  hear  what  it  all  m.ight 
mean.  And  when  Peter,  standing  up  with  the  eleven,  lifted 
his  voice  and  spake  unto  them,  his  first  word  of  explanation 
was,  that  it  Avas  the  fulfillment  of  the  prophecy  of  Joel,  which 
we  have  already  quoted. 

If  this  miraculous  outpouring  of  the  Holy  Spirit  on  the  day 
of  Pentecost  had  not  been  followed  by  real  manifestations  of 
power,  what  Paul  calls  "  demonstration  of  the  spirit  and  of 
power,"  (1  Cor.  2 :  4),  can  we  doubt  that,  in  a  little  while,  mar- 
vellous as  it  was,  it  would  have  been  forgotten  as  a  passing 
prodigy,  inexplicable  and  wonderful  indeed,  but  of  no  living 
significance  or  interest  in  the  faith  or  fortunes  of  men  ?  It  was 
necessary  that  this  divine  agent,  so  grandly  introduced  as  the 
Minister  of  the  Father  and  the  Son  in  the  new  reign,  should  do 
works  worthy  of  his  office,  and  in  demonstration  of  the  majesty 
and  beneficence  of  the  mission  on  which  he  was  sent. 

The  Spirit  of  the  new  movement  and  of  the  new  life  must 
show  himself  as  a  divine  being ;  not  as  a  mere  sentiment,  a 
popular  idea,  a  dominating  thought,  itself  only  the  ripened  fruit 
of  antecedent  agencies  working  out  their  line  of  logical  devel- 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  283 

opment  in  a  historical  sequence  of  causes  and  effects ;  but  as 
a  being  of  living,  present,  pervasive  power,  proceeding  from  the 
Father  and,  the  Son  and  commissioned  to  teach  and  to  comfort, 
to  work  with  divine  intelligence  and  plastic  power  in  planting 
and  nourishing  the  church  as  the  living  and  organic  embodi- 
ment of  "  the  Kingdom  "  in  the  world ;  and  with  sympathetic 
helpfulness  in  the  sanctification  and  guidance  of  each  member 
of  its  fellowship. 

Accordingly,  we  find  that  the  disciples,  who  had  been  only 
quietly,  though  hopefully,  waiting  at  Jerusalem  till  the  Spirit 
was  given,  were  suddenly  inspired  with  a  new  life,  and  directed 
by  a  new  guidance.  It  is  remarkable  with  what  sudden  bold- 
ness and  inspired  intelligence  they  stand  forth  as  the  author- 
ized heralds  and  nuncios  of  the  grace  of  the  Gospel !  The 
Spirit  that  has  fallen  upon  them  is  not  a  dumb  Spirit ;  not  an 
ignorant  Spirit ;  not  a  muttering  oracle  of  dark  and  meaning- 
less mysteries.  It  is  a  spirit  of  divine  eloquence  ;  of  illuminat" 
ing  truth  ;  of  clear  and  immortal  words  of  light  and  life ;  a 
Spirit  charged  with  the  things  of  Christ,  and  showing  them, 
through  the  apostles,  to  the  people.  This  first  day's  work  of 
the  new  "  minister"  is  worthy  of  his  mission.  It  lays  the  foun- 
dation of  a  new  kingdom — the  kingdom  of  heaven,  in  the  res- 
urrection of  Christ  from  the  dead,  and  in  his  glorification  by  the 
Father  as  King ;  it  convicts  the  Jews  of  his  crucifixion ;  it 
brings  them  to  a  fearful  outcry  for  deliverence  from  their  guilt  • 
and  proclaims  to  tliem  the  terms  and  conditions  of  tlieir  pardon, 
of  the  remission  of  their  sins,  and  the  promise  of  the  gift  of  the 
Holy  Spirit.  Are  not  these  marvelous  disclosures  ?  Who,  by 
searching,  could  have  found  them  out?  Only  he,  of  whom  the 
Savior  said,  "  He  shall  glorify  me,  for  he  shall  take  of  mine  and 
shall  declare  it  unto  you,"  could  have  been  the  author  of  revela- 
tions so  new,  so  high  above  human  discovery,  so  revolutionary 
in  their  bearing  upon  human  theories  of  law  and  duty  and 
destiny,  and  so  full  of  hope  and  deliverance  to  souls  oppressed 
with  the  consciousness  of  sin  and  groping  blindly  for  relief. 


284  THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 

Was  there  ever  victory  like  that  which  had  been  won  by  Christ! 
Was  there  ever  guilt  so  deep  and  dark,  as  that  which  had  been 
incurred  by  his  crucifixion ;  was  there  ever  pardon  so  free  and 
universal  in  its  proffer,  as  that  which  was  offered  to  the  guilty ; 
were  there  ever  gifts  and  privileges  and  honors,  so  rich,  so  free, 
so  ennobling,  as  those  held  out  by  the  princely  hand  of  the  new- 
king,  freely,  without  money  and  without  price,  to  all  who  would 
accept  them!  Only  when  we  behold  the  inspiration  of  the 
Spirit  in  the  face  of  the  divinely  appointed  orator  of  Pentecost,  can 
we  account  for  the  preternatural  illumination  of  his  intelligence. 
We  are  constrained  to  conclude  that  he  must  have  spoken  as 
tlie  Spirit  gate  Mm  utterance. 

This  beginning  of  the  new  reign  is  formal  and  imposing, 
because  it  is  new,  and  because  it  is  the  inauguration  among 
men  and  for  men,  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaten. 

The  power  of  its  founder  must  be  seen  in  its  administration. 
It  must  be,  beyond  dispute,  the  work  of  the  Paraclete,  and, 
accordingly,  it  is  the  burthen  of  the  Book  of  Acts  to  set  this 
forth.  Peter  sets  the  example  of  emphasizing  it.  "  Jesus,"  he 
cries,  "  being  at  the  right  hand  of  God  exalted,  and  having 
received  of  the  Father  the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  hath 
poured  forth  this,  which  you  see  and  hear."    (Acts  2  :  33.) 

The  three  thousand  converts  at  the  first  proclamation  of  the 
mercy  of  the  Gospel  acknowledge  it.  They  remain  together  as 
under  a  new  bond  of  fellowship  ;  sell  their  possessions ;  make 
free  provision  for  the  common  need ;  and  are  "  steadfast  in  the 
apostles'  teaching  and  fellowship,  in  the  breaking  of  bread  and 
the  prayers."  (Acts  2  :  42).  They  sit  at  the  feet  of  their  new 
teachers  and  accept  their  lessons  as  the  oracles  of  God,  the 
infallible  words  of  inspiration.  It  is  God  who  speaks ;  the 
Father  and  the  Son,  through  the  Holy  Spirit  who  proceedeth 
from  them.  This  teaching  of  the  apostles  is  from  them.  What- 
ever rationalistic  wavering  professed  Christian  interpreters  may 
stagger  under  as  to  other  Scriptures,  here  there  is  no  ambiguity. 
The  direct,  yea,  dictatorial  guidance  and  illumination  of  the 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  285 


apostles  is  asserted  and  acknowledged,  without  a  shadow  of 
qualification  or  doubt.  Consciously  all  felt,  "  It  is  not  ye 
that  speak,  but  the  Spirit  of  your  Father  that  speaketh  in  you" 
(Matt.  10  :  20).  Let  destructive  criticism  do  its  work,  cast  the 
upas  shadow  of  its  evil-hearted  conjectures  at  whatever  else 
it  may,  this  remaineth.  The  original  proclamation  of  the  grace 
of  the  Gospel — faith,  repentance,  baptism,  the  remission  of 
sins,  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit — this  is  from  the  new  king,  by 
his  minister,  the  Spirit  of  Truth. 

There  is  no  pause  or  relaxation  in  the  energy  and  zeal  of 
the  newly  inspired  agents  in  this  wonderful  pouring  forth  of 
divine  influence.  The  miraculous  proclamation  is  followed  by 
evidencing  manifestations  of  preternatural  power.  The  Son 
hath  gone  to  the  Father,  as  he  said,  but  the  "  greater  works  " 
which  he  promised  should  be  done  through  faith  in  his  name, 
follow,  thick  and  fast,  in  testimony  of  the  apostles'  teaching,  in 
proof  of  the  abiding  and  active  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit. 
Peter  and  John  are  going  up  into  the  temple  at  the  hour  of 
morning  prayer,  and,  in  the  presence  of  the  pressing  crowds  that 
surge  through  the  gate  which  is  called  "Beautiful,"  a  notable 
cripple,  born  lame,  a  familiar  object  of  charity,  begs  them  for 
alms,  and  with  a  word,  "  In  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  of  Naza- 
reth," Peter  cries  out  to  him,  "  Walk,  "  and,  taking  him  by  the 
hand,  raises  him  up ;  and  immediately  strength  comes  into 
his  limbs,  and  the  people  who  had  known  him  long  as  the 
impotent  cripple  at  the  gate,  again  recognize  him,  as  they  see 
and  hear  him,  walking  and  leaping,  and  praising  God,  and, 
are  filled  with  wonder  and  amazement  at  the  miracle.  The 
wildest  excitement  runs  through  the  multitudes ;  they  crowd,  in 
Solomon's  portico,  around  these  apostles  to  whom  the  impotent 
man  is  gratefully  clinging,  and  are  eager  to  explore  the  mys- 
tery. Peter  is  equally  eager  to  explain.  He  disclaims,  at  once, 
any  "power  or  godliness  of  their  own,"  as  its  cause.  He 
recites,  as  in  his  first  sermon,  the  great  fundamental  facts  of  the 
Gospel ;  shows  that  what  they  have  just  witnessed  is  only  th8 


286  THE  DOCTBIXE  COXCEBXIXG  TEE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 


fulfillment  of  the  promise  of  prophecy ;  and  ascribes  it  to  the 
exalted  Christ,  whom  they  had  slain.  The  miracle  is  a  "  demon- 
stration of  the  Spirit  and  of  power,"  given  through  them  as 
witnesses  of  the  resurrected  and  enthroned  Christ. 

Such  demonstrations  win  upon  the  confidence  of  the  people. 
Many,  about  five  thousand,  that  hear  the  word,  believe.  The 
rulers  and  elders  and  scribes,  the  high  priest  and  many  of  his 
kindi'ed.  come  together  to  investigate  the  wonder.  Xothing  is 
done  in  a  corner.  The  Gospel  for  the  world  must  give  account 
of  itself.  The  messengers  through  whom  it  is  proclaimed  must 
explain  b}'  what  power  or  in  what  name  they  have  done  this 
miracle  of  healing ;  and  again,  "  Peter,  filled  with  the  'Kolj 
Spirit,"  answers  as  before.  What  else  can  the  Holy  Spirit  do, 
but  glorify  Jesus  i  He  is  sent,  not  to  speak  of  himself,  but  to 
declare  the  things  of  Jesus.  The  demonstration  of  the  Spirit 
and  of  power"  confronts  the  jealous  rulers  of  Israel,  sitting  in 
judgment  upon  the  apostles ;  the  man  who  was  healed,  and  the 
apostles  through  whom  it  was  done,  stand,  face  to  face,  with  the 
judges.  The  notable  miracle  "  cannot  be  denied  ;  they  do  not 
deny  it,  they  admit  it ;  and  the  men  who  ascribe  it  to  the  risen 
Jesus  are  known  to  have  been  with  him,  his  disciples.  "What 
must  be  done,  what  can  be  done  I  The  argument  is  too  logical 
for  a  refutation,  the  facts  are  too  potent  for  denial.  Nothing  is 
left  but  to  silence  the  preachers,  to  suppress  the  truth  by  an 
edict  of  oflScial  authority.  Therefore  they  command  Peter  and 
John  to  speak  no  more  in  the  name  of  Jesus. 

If  these  apostles  had  been  left  to  themselves,  the  mandate 
of  this  supreme  authority  in  Israel  would,  probabh*.  have  been 
sufficient  to  silence  them.  A  similar  menace  had  made  Peter 
deny  his  Master  once  before.  But  now,  what  is  his  answer  ? 
He  is  "filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit now;  and,  though  the  high- 
est power  of  the  world  is  against  him,  "greater  is  he  that  is  in 
him,  than  he  that  is  in  the  world"  (1  John  4:4);  and  he  answers 
boldly  :  Whether  it  be  right  in  the  sight  of  God  to  hearken, 
unto  you  rather  than  unto  God,  judge  ye :  for  we  cannot  bu 


TEE  DOCTEINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIPdT.  287 


speak  the  thing  which  we  saw  and  heard."  The  divine  compul- 
sion is  upon  them,  and  it  is  greater  than  the  fear  of  the  world. 
The  threats  of  judicial  authority  have  no  power  to  restrain 
them. 

The  source  of  this  new  and  dauntless  courage  of  these  apos- 
tles is  made  as  consj^icuous  in  the  narrative  of  Acts,  as  is  the 
fact  itself.  They  report  to  their  own  company  all  that  the  chief 
priests  and  the  elders  had  said  unto  them,  and  in  the  sympathy 
of  a  common  brotherhood,  they  lift  up  their  united  voice  in 
prayer  to  the  "  maker  of  the  heaven  and  the  earth  and  the  sea, 
and  all  that  in  them  is,"  that  he  will  "  look  upon  these  threaten- 
ings ;  and  grant  unto  his  servants  to  speak  his  word  with  bold- 
ness, while,  by  them,  his  hand  is  stretched  forth  to  heal ;  and 
signs  and  wonders  are  done  through  the  name  of  his  holy 
Serva«"t  Jesus."  The  answer  to  this  prayer  is  quick  and 
explicit.  The  place  is  shaken  wherein  they  were  gathered 
together;  and  they  are  filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit,  and,  under  its 
inspiration,  they  do  "  speak  the  word  of  God  with  boldness  ; 
and  with  great  power  give  their  witness  of  the  resurrection  of 
the  Lord  Jesus ;  and  great  grace  is  upon  them  all."  Acts  3 : 
31-34. 

Evidently,  the  advocacy  of  the  apostles  is  guided,  enlight- 
ened, and  animated  with  its  heroic  courage,  by  the  direct,  the 
immediate  influence  of  the  divine  Advocate,  the  Paraclete, 
whom  Jesus  had  promised  to  send  for  this  very  purpose.  His 
glorious  advent  on  the  day  of  Pentecost  was  not  a  transient 
dramatic  prodigy,  a  deus  ex  macldna  to  meet  an  emergency ; 
but  the  coming  of  a  divine  Minister  to  abide  permanently  in 
the  new  Kingdom  ;  to  take  up  his  abode  in  the  hearts  of  its  sub- 
jects, individually,  and  to  marshal  them  in  an  organic  fellow- 
ship of  service  through  the  Church,  for  carrying  the  Gospel  to 
all  the  world.  Every  step  in  their  service  is  watched  over  and 
every  avenue  of  corruption  is  guarded.  When  the  spontane- 
ous affluence  of  the  new  fellowship  was  pouring  itself  out  in 
gifts  for  the  common  support,  so  that  there  were  none  among 


288  THE  DOCTBINE  CONCEE^VNG  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 


them  that  "lacked,"  the  beauty  and  popular  appreciation  of 
the  charity  soon  became  a  perilous  temptation  to  hypocrites  to 
seek  its  praise  by  false  returns  of  their  possessions.  Ananias, 
with  Sappliira  his  wife,  witnessing  the  generous  contribution  of 
Barnabas,  who  sold  his  field,  and  brought  the  money,  and  laid 
it  at  the  feet  of  the  apostles,  for  the  common  weal,  sought  to 
gain  the  credit  of  a  like  nobility,  and  also  "  sold  a  possession, 
but  kept  back  a  part  of  the  price,  and  brought  only  a  part,  and 
laid  it  at  the  apostles'  feet."  How  is  this  hypocrisy  regarded 
by  Peter  ?  Not  simply  as  an  attempt  to  deceive  the  apostles, 
but  as  a  lie  to  tlie  Holy  Spirit.  "  Thou  hast  not  lied  unto 
man,  but  unto  God."  The  immanence  of  the  Spirit,  "who  search- 
eth  all  things,  yea,  the  deep  things  of  God,"  is  brought  out  by 
this  first  signal  attempt  to  corrupt  the  fellowship  of  the  church, 
and  the  sudden  and  tragic  fate  of  its  authors  is  made  a  terrific 
example,  both  of  the  guilt  and  the  fearful  vindication  of  the 
divine  judgment  against  its  perpetration.  "  Great  fear  came 
upon  the  whole  church,  and  upon  all  who  heard  these  things." 
The  lesson  was  impressive.  Hypocrites  could  not  trifle  with  the 
Minister  of  this  new  Kingdom,  could  not  lie  to  him  with 
impunity,  for  his  watchful  presence  abideth  with  us,  and  his 
omniscience  searcheth  all  things. 

We  can  lay  the  infallible  premises  of  the  doctrine  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  only  by  inductively  determining  what  is  given  in 
revelation  concerning  it.  We  can  aifirm  nothing  a  priori.  The 
subject  is  one  ^uvelj  preternatural,  and  the  basis  of  all  we  can 
know,  by  explicit  statement,  or  logical  inference,  or  spiritual 
apprehension,  must  be  given  from  above.  Revealed  light  is  the 
only  light  of  our  seeing,  and  this — descendit  e  coelo — comes 
from  above.  We  commenced  our  investigation  with  the  marvel- 
ous manifestations  of  the  day  of  Pentecost,  and  the  promises  of 
prophecy  relating  to  them,  because  the  light  is  fuller,  and,  at 
the  same  time,  tlie  facts  are  primary  and  typical  of  the  whole 
period  of  inspiration.  They  present  and  illustrate,  in  a  com- 
prehensive and  adequate  way,  the  principles  governing  and 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  TEE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  289 

shaping  the  history  of  the  whole  apostolic  period — the  period  of 
inspiration  and  of  miracle  working. 

The  work  begun  on  Pentecost  under  the  ministry  of  the  Par- 
aclete, moves  forward  by  the  same  power  and  guidance.  The 
care  of  the  daily  increasing  number  of  the  disciples  calls  for 
organization.  It  is  a  necessary  and  a  great  work,  to  minister  to 
their  daily  wants,  and  a  complaint  comes  up  that  the  widows  of 
the  Grecians  are  neglected  in  the  daily  ministrations.  But  this 
care  is  too  much  for  the  ajjostles.  Therefore,  they  are  compelled 
to  resort  to  the  principle  of  the  division  of  labor  to  meet  it.  The 
initiatory  step  to  an  order  of  deacons  is  taken.  Suitable  persons 
must  be  set  apart  for  this  service,  and  their  prime  qualification 
is  that  they  shall  be  men  "  full  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  (Acts  6 :  3.) 
We  notice  that  this  primary  stej)  in  the  distribution  of  the  min- 
isterial agencies  of  the  church  is  taken  with  an  appeal  to  the 
apostles,  and  with  their  sanction  and  under  their  direction. 
They  decide  upon  and  authorize  the  new  order  of  ministerial 
service,  prescribe  the  qualifications  of  the  agents,  and  finally 
ordain  them,  with  fasting  and  prayer,  by  the  laying  on  of 
hands ;  but  the  choice  of  the  "  men  "  to  be  appointed,  is  given  to 
"  the  multitude  of  the  disciples."  The  whole  movement,  every 
step  in  the  organic  development,  is  within  the  pale  of  the  regen- 
erated people  of  God.  It  is  a  ministry  of  a  Spiritual  Kingdom, 
for  the  people  and  by  the  people,  under  the  guidance  of  the 
Spirit  of  the  new  life  into  which  they  were  born.  The  church, 
therefore,  is  a  spiritual  body,  both  in  its  membership  and  its 
organism.  Its  most  secular  aflairs  are  confided  to  spiritual 
men. 

Stephen,  the  first  martyr,  dies  with  stedfastness  and  fidel- 
ity, sustained  and  illumined  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  It  is  said  of 
him,  "Being  full  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  looked  up  stedfastly 
into  heaven  and  saw  the  glory  of  God,  and  Jesus  standing  on 
the  right  hand  of  God."  And  with  this  testimony  on  his  lips, 
he  dies,  committing,  in  his  last  words,  his  spirit  to  the  Lord 
Jesus,  and  praying,  as  his  Lord  had  done  before  him,  for  the 

19 


290  TEE  DOCTBIXE  CONCEBNIXG  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 


forgiveness  of  his  persecutors.  His  dying  argument  is  a  lucid 
statement  of  the  historic  basis  of  Christianity.  "  Their  fathers'' 
had  persecuted  the  prophets,  and  slain  them  which  shewed  before 
of  the  coming  of  the  Just  One  ;  and,  now,  their  own  hands  are  red 
with  his  innocent  blood!  In  all  this,  they  had,  alike,  "resisted 
the  Holy  Spirit." 

When  Saul  is  under  conviction,  and  waiting  in  utter  dark- 
ness, physical  and  spiritual,  and  praying  for  light,  Ananias  is 
sent  to  him,  "  that  he  might  receive  his  sight  and  be  filled  with 
the  Holy  Spirit."  When,  too,  after  a  season  of  fierce  and  relent- 
less persecution,  the  churches  had  rest  throughout  all  Judea, 
and  Galilee  and  Samaria,  the  picture  of  their  life  is,  that  "  walk- 
ing in  the  fear  of  the  Lord  and  in  the  comfort  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
they  were  multiplied."  At  the  extension  of  the  promise  of  the 
salvation  of  the  Gospel  to  the  Gentiles,  the  inspiration,  guid- 
ance and  sanction  of  the  Holy  Spirit  are  everywliere  explicitly 
seen  and  emphasized.  Peter,  in  vindication  of  his  connection 
with  this  great  and,  to  the  Jews  zealous  for  the  supposed  limita- 
tions of  the  law,  startling  innovation,  says,  "  As  I  began  to 
speak,  the  Holy  Spirit  fell  on  them,  even  as  on  us  at  the  begin- 
ning. Then  remembered  I  the  word  of  the  Lord,  how  he  said, 
John  indeed  baptized  with  water ;  but  ye  shall  be  baptized  with 
the  Holy  Spirit.  Forasmuch  then  as  God  gave  them  the  like 
gift  as  he  did  unto  us,  who  believed  on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ; 
■what  was  I  that  I  could  withstand  God?"  The  sanction  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  the  end  of  controversy.  It  could  not  be  denied 
that  "  God  had,  also,  to  the  Gentiles  granted  repentance  unto 
life." 

Upon  the  persecution  that  arose  about  Stephen,  "  the  disci- 
ples were  scattered  abroad,"  and,  so,  "  the  preaching  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  "  was  carried  into  new  fields ;  but  everywhere  we  see 
it  is  through  the  guided  and  guiding  influence  of  men  sent  out 
by  the  church  and  "  full  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  Barnabas  and 
Saul  are  conspicuous  in  this  work  of  ministerial  extension  and 
supervision.    One  was  an  apostle  and  both  held  high  official 


THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  291 


relations  with  the  church ;  yet,  we  are  told  that  when  they  went 
out  from  Antioch  on  their  great  missionary  tour,  it  was  by  the 
express  command  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  saying,  "  Separate  me  Bar- 
nabas and  Saul  for  the  work  whereunto  I  have  called  them  ; " 
and,  so,  with  prayer  and  fasting,  the  church  at  Antioch 
ordained  them  and  sent  them  away  ;  but,  as  it  is  done  by  the 
express  instruction  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  is  said,  "  they  were  sent 
by  the  Holy  Spirit."  (Acts  13:  2,  3.)  Thus  was  the  gospel 
preached  by  these  great  missionaries,  over  wide  fields  ripe  for 
the  harvest,  and  the  Holy  Spirit  was  with  them  in  their  great 
contentions.  It  gave  courage  in  opposition ;  guidance  and 
illumination,  in  new  and  difficult  questions,  both  of  doctrine  and 
practice ;  deliverance,  even  to  the  putting  forth  of  marvelous 
power,  from  the  violence  and  persecution  of  enemies  ;  and  com- 
fort and  confidence  in  sufferings  and  discouragements  under 
which,  otherwise,  their  faith  must  have  staggered  and  their 
hearts  have  failed  them.  Thus  "  mightily  grew  the  word  of  God 
and  prevailed." 

We  might  pursue  this  induction  through  the  whole  history 
of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  so  far  as  they  have  been  delivered 
to  us,  but  it  would  present  no  fact  in  the  agency  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  revealing  anything  further  in  principle  or  method,  than 
what  has  been  already  illustratively  presented.  In  the  epistles, 
we  find  the  same  pervasive  presence  and  agency  of  the  Holy 
Spirit  constantly  affirmed  or  assumed.  It  is  the  regulative 
conception  of  all  their  reasonings  concerning  the  new  life  in  the 
hearts  of  disciples,  the  prime  divine  agency  of  all  spiritual 
power  and  inspiration  in  the  Kingdom  of  Christ.  But  while 
nothing  can  be  more  real  than  the  fact  of  this  presence  and 
influence,  pervasive  and  personal,  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the 
hearts  of  the  disciples  and  in  their  activity  and  unity  in  the 
organic  life  of  the  church,  we  do  not  find  in  the  New  Testament, 
in  which  all  this  is  so  vividly  presented,  any  formal  dogmatic 
statement  of  what  we  can  call  a  "doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit." 
The  method  of  the  Scriptures — the  method  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is 


292  THE  DOCTRINE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT. 

to  take  of  the  things  of  Christ  and  shew  them  unto  us.  It  is  to 
manifest.    "  He  shall  take  of  mine  and  show  it  unto  you." 

This  mission  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  however,  has  with  it  and  in 
it,  the  falness  of  the  divine  power  and  purpose  in  the  work  of 
human  redemption.  For  "  He  proceedeth  from  the  Father  and 
the  Son,"  {procedit  a  patre  fiUoque,  John  15:  26).  As  our 
Savior  said  of  himself,  "  My  Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I 
work ;"  so  we  may  say  of  the  Holy  Spirit :  "The  Father  and  the 
Son  now  work  in,  with  and  by  the  Holy  Spirit."  This  is  true  in 
the  establishment,  maintenance  and  perfecting  of  the  church. 
Father,  Son  and  Holy  Spirit  are  one  in  all  that  pertains  to  the 
kingly  dominion  of  Christ.  The  ministry  of  the  Holy  Spirit  is 
to  do  the  will  of  the  Father  in  glorifying  the  Son.  For  this  pur- 
pose is  he  sent,  and  to  this  end  does  he  work ;  and  for  this  is 
all  the  power  of  the  God-head  immanent  in  him ;  and  he  is  in 
the  hearts  of  the  Lord's  redeemed,  semper  et  ubique,  "always 
and  everywhere,"  and,  in  this  organic  life,  the  church,  "  reveals 
himself"  as  the  "Spirit  of  gospel  history,"  "the  Spirit  of  recol- 
lection and  the  Spirit  of  illumination."  He  quickens  the 
memory  to  recall,  he  opens  the  eye  to  see,  and  through  this 
inspiration,  he  holds  up  before  the  soul  the  divine  pattern  of 
Christ,  and  with  plastic  power,  forms  the  new  life  within  us,  in 
his  likeness.  As  he  is  the  author  of  our  new  life,  he  is  a  life- 
giving  Spirit ;  as  he  brings  us  out  of  the  bondage  of  sin,  he  is  a 
liberating  Spirit ;  as  he  forms  us  into  the  image  of  Christ,  he  is 
a  plastic  Spirit.  Proceeding  from  the  Father  and  the  Son,  and 
sent  to  carry  on  and  accomplish  these  regenerating,  developing 
and  perfecting  operations  in  the  work  of  redemption,  we  must 
regard  him,  in  any  scriptural  science  of  divine  things,  as  the 
agent  in  the  trinity  of  the  divine  operations  of  grace. 

How  this  agent  operates  in  the  human  soul,  we  cannot,  I 
humbly  think,  fully  comprehend.  To  transfer  spiritual  death 
into  spiritual  life,  demands,  I  think,  the  operation  of  a  spiritual 
agency  essentially  supra-creatural.  If  our  regeneration  is  more 
than  a  merely  natural  development  of  the  old  life,  if  it  be  a 


THE  BOCTHnJE  CONCERNING  THE  HOLY  SPIRIT.  293 


true  new  'beginning  of  life,  then  it  must  have  a  cause  out  of 
itself,  higher  and  greater  than  itself;  and  this  cause  must  have 
real  connection  with  the  soul  that  is  "  born  again." 

In  the  natural  creation — "in  the  beginning" — the  Spirit 
brooded  upon  the  chaos  and  quickened  it  into  the  myriad  forms 
of  life  that  beautify  and  bless  the  earth.  So,  in  the  new  creation 
— the  Spiritual — the  mystery  of  a  higher  life  breaks  upon  us. 
It  is  the  mystery  of  the  incarnation,  the  taking  up  of  the 
human  into  the  divine,  and  so  the  making  of  a  "new  creature," 
stamped  with  the  image  of  Christ,  and  walking  in  the  beauty  of 
holiness.  That  which  is  new  is  real — essential — and  must 
abide.  "If  we  have  not  the  Spirit  of  Christ  we  are  none  of  his ;" 
and  if  his  Spirit — ^greater  than  our  spirit — be  in  us,  how  can  it 
be,  that  it  should  riot  work  in  us  to  will  and  to  do,  and  to  form 
a  real  union  and  blessed  unity,  with  a  single  consciousness  of 
harmony,  that  says  always,  "  Thy  will  be  done  V 


EEFOEMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH— SOME  OF  ITS  RESULTS. 


J.  M.  TRIBLE. 

In  the  reformation  of  the  church  one  name  stands  justly  pre- 
eminent. In  purging  the  church  of  its  errors  and  corruptions 
the  work  of  Martin  Luther  is  above  all  comparison.  His  contri- 
bution to  the  cause  of  purifying  the  faith  and  the  morals  of  the 
church  is  larger  than  that  of  any  who  went  before  him  or  fol- 
lowed after  him.  Savanarola,  for  example,  was  a  reformer,  but 
on  how  small  a  scale  and  with  how  little  permanent  result. 
Indeed,  Savanarola's  greatest  service  to  reformation  is  to  proph- 
esy its  coming.  His  chief  distinction  is  as  the  harbinger  of 
reformation.  The  great  burden  of  his  message  is  summed  up  in 
these  three  points  :  Tlie  church  shall  be  scourged ;  this  scourg- 
ing is  imminent ;  from  her  scourging  she  shall  arise  purified  and 
renewed.  And  having  delivered  his  message  Savanarola  is 
removed  without  seeing  any  part  of  it  fulfilled.  Or  if  we  go  a 
little  farther  back  to  the  work  of  Wicklilfe,  we  shall  see  that 
he  is  not  so  much  a  reformer  as  the  prophet  of  reformation.  He 
predicts  a  day  which  he  cannot  bring  in.  He  foresees  and  fore- 
tells a  time  when  some  humble  monk  shall  rise  up  and  smite 
the  existing  errors  and  corruptions  in  the  church  without  fear 
and  without  mercy.  Compared  with  this  coming  reformer 
"VVicklifFe  acknowledges  himself  but  a  herald  and  a  prophet. 
"Without  Luther  we  should,  perhaps,  never  have  heard  of  Wick- 
liffe.  But  the  converse  is  not  true.  We  should  have  heard  of 
Luther  if  WickliflFe  had  never  lived,  though  we  should  not  have 
heard  of  him  so  soon  or  to  so  much  effect.  And  may  we  not 
say  the  same  of  later  reformers  ?  Luther  was  not  dependent  on 
Calvin,  or  Cranmer,  or  Knox,  or  Wesley,  or  Campbell,  to  per- 
jietuate  his  name  and  work.  Had  these  never  lived  Luther 
should  still  endure  ;  but  these  had  remained  forever  "  mute  and 

294 


J.  M.  TKHU.K. 


JoHx  M.  Trible  was  born  near  Dunnsville,  in  Essex  Co.,  Virginia,  Aug. 
18th.  1851.  lie  was  educateil  mainly  in  Dunnsville  Academy  and  in  Beth- 
any College.  He  Avas  baptized  in  August,  1869.  entered  Bethany  College 
in  187;),  and  graduated  in  June.  1875  In  November  of  the  same  year  iie 
took  charge  of  the  church  at  Norfolk.  Va.  He  remained  there  until  Septem- 
ber, 1877,  when  lie  removed  to  Franklin.  Tenn.  From  Franklin,  he  went  to 
Menipiiis.  Tenn.,  January,  187!*.  In  August.  1882,  he  accepted  the  pastorate 
of  the  Church  in  Buffalo,  N.  Y.,  succeeding  G.  L.  AVharton,  who  went  as  a 
missionary  to  India.  He  remained  here  until  January,  1887,  when  lie  went 
to  St.  Louis  to  take  the  position  of  otiice  editor  of  the  Chuistian-Evanoemst. 
While  there  lie  also  occupied  the  pulpit  of  the  Central  Church.  In  February. 
1888,  he  was  called  back  to  the  pastorate  of  the  Buffalo  Church,  and  remained 
there  imtil  he  accepted  the  professorship  of  New  Testament  Theology  in 
Bethany  College,  in  September.  1880.  and  was  also  made  \'ice-President  of 
the  institution.  On  the  resignation  of  President  McLean,  he  was  chosen  to 
act  as  chairman  of  the  Faculty  and  president,  pro  (cm.  His  love  for  the  work 
in  which  he  is  now  engaged  is  indicated  bv  the  hope  he  expressed  in  a  letter 
to  the  writer,  that  his  next  move  Avould  be  to  heaven.  He  has  maintained 
his  relation  with  the  Chi;istian-Evaxi;elist,  as  one  of  its  writers,  since  liis 
tirst  connection  Avith  it,  and  now  contributes  the  Sunday-school  articles  to  its 
editorial  pages. 

He  was  married,  June  24th,  1879,  to  Miss  Susie  Campbell,  daughter  of 
"William  P.  and  Susan  Campbell,  of  Franklin,  Tenn.  Four  children — two 
boys  and  two  girls — have  blessed  this  union.  He  attributes  chief  credit  for 
whatever  he  has  been  able  to  accomplish,  thus  far,  to  his  estimable  wife. 
Though  still  a  young  man,  he  has  Avon  a  high  place  in  the  contidence  of  his 
brethren,  as  a  thinker,  preacher  anil  Avriter. 


Since  the  foregoing  was  electrotyped  we  are  called  on  to  make  the  sor- 
roAvful  addition  that  Prof.  Trible  died  at  Bethany.  West  Va.,  Sept.  25th,  of 
typhoid  feAer.  His  death  aAvakened  profounil  sorroAV  throughout  the  broth- 
erhood. We  had  all  come  to  love  him  for  his  beautiful  character,  and  to 
trust  him,  because  of  liis  wisdom.  His  sun  has  gone  doAvn  ere  it  is  yet  noon. 
His  life  had  great  promise  of  usefulness.  We  are  all  losers  by  his  seemingly 
premature  departure.  But  God  knows,  and  Jet  us  not  doubt  He  lias  use  for 
such  true  spirits  in  the  higher  activities  of  the  spiritual  realm.  His  wish 
that  he  might  go  to  lieaven  from  Old  Bethany  has  been  fultillcd,  but  alas! 
how  much  sooner  than  he  or  Ave  anticijjatedl  Tiirice  precious  now  are  the 
wise  Avords  and  the  faithful  portrait  Avhich  this  volume  contains  of  our  de- 
parted brother. 


REFORMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH. 


295 


inglorious  "  had  not  this  little  German  monk,  with  his  implicit 
and  intrepid  faith  in  God,  gone  before  them.  The  reformation 
came  by  Luther  and  it  continues  in  virtue  of  those  principles 
which  Luther  j)roclaimed,  but  of  whose  far-reaching  results 
Luther  did  not  ev^en  faintly  conceive ;  from  some  of  which,  when 
he  did  perceive  them  truly,  he  recoiled. 

We  have  come  to  speak  of  the  Lutheran  reformation  as  dis- 
tinct from  those  which  followed  it ;  and  the  distinction  is  both 
correct  and  convenient.  But  every  reformation  since  the  time 
of  Luther  has  been  nothing  but  the  principle  of  the  Lutheran 
movement  carried  into  other  countries  and  other  centuries. 
Luther's  doctrine  of  the  sovereignty  of  God  over  pope,  and 
priest,  and  prince,  is  the  great  principle  of  the  reformation 
under  Calvin  ;  his  doctrine  of  the  priesthood  of  all  believers,  or 
the  equality  of  all  men  before  God,  is  the  principle  of  the  Puri- 
tan reformation ;  his  doctrine  of  justification  by  a  personal  faith 
in  God,  and  a  personal  appropriation  and  experience  of  his 
mercy,  was  the  main  power  of  the  Wesley  an  revival,  and  his 
doctrine  of  the  right  and  the  duty  of  private  interpretation  of 
the  Scriptures,  creed  and  clergy  to  the  contrary  notwithstand- 
ing, and  of  the  supreme  authority  of  the  Word  of  God  implied  in 
this  right  of  private  judgment,  is  one  of  the  fundamental  princi- 
ples of  the  reformation  begun  by  Thomas  and  Alexander  Camp- 
bell. It  is  no  reproach  to  us  that  there  is  nothing  new  in  our 
plea.  It  is  in  fact  only  the  plea  of  Luther  brought  down  to  the 
nineteenth  century  and  carried  out  to  its  logical  result.  The 
reformation  begun  by  Luther  contained  in  it,  to  use  that  well- 
worn  but  happy  phrase,  "  the  power  and  the  potency  "  of  all 
reformations  which  were  to  follow.  Then  the  tide  of  reforma- 
tion set  in  and  it  is  still  going  on  toward  its  flood. 

To  trace  out  all  the  results  of  this  reformation  would  take 
years,  and  to  record  them  would  take  volumes.  Time  and  space 
alike  forbid  any  exhaustive  enumeration  of  the  results  of  refor- 
mation in  the  church.  I  can  only  hope  to  suggest  some  of  the 
most  obvious  and  important. 


296 


BEFORMATION  IN  THE  CEURCH. 


I.    THE  PdGHT  OF  EEFOBMATIOX. 

One  of  the  most  evident  and  beneficent  results  of  reformation 
in  the  church  is  that  the  right  of  reformation  is  established  for- 
ever. The  consideration  which  made  reformation  fairly  impos- 
sible for  so  many  centuries  and  so  difficult  in  later  times,  was 
the  assumed  authority  of  the  priesthood.  The  corruption  and 
deformation  of  the  church  has  always  begun  in  a  corrupt  and 
faithless  ministry.  One  who  carefully  reads  the  Bible  hears 
throughout  its  solemn  and  terrible  warnings  against  the  false 
teacher.  His  sin  is  drawn  in  darkest  colors  because  he  not 
only  goes  astray  from  God  himself  but  drags  the  church  after 
him.  And  it  has  ever  been  a  trick  of  these  teachers  to  affect 
authority  iu  proportion  to  their  unworthiness  to  exercise  it. 
The  lower  their  aims  and  motives,  the  louder  their  claims  to  be 
the  organs  and  repositories  of  the  divine  grace  and  goodness. 
The  most  corrupt  priest  is  always  the  most  arrogant  iu  the 
assertion  of  his  dignity  and  in  the  exercise  of  his  authority. 
Thus  these  blind  leaders  of  the  blind  go  on  in  their  career  of  sin 
unchecked  and  almost  unchallenged  by  any.  What  amazes  us 
when  we  study  the  lives  of  the  reformers  is,  not  the  argument 
with  which  their  plea  for  reform  was  met,  but  this  everlasting 
assertion  of  authority  against  argument.  "  Who  are  you  that 
you  dare  to  lift  up  your  voice  against  priest  and  prelate,  or  what 
blasphemy  is  this  you  speak,  saying  that  the  holy  father  can 
do  wrong  This  is  the  question  which  confronted  the  reformer 
continually,  and  before  which  he  so  often  grew  pale  and  hope- 
less. There  can  be  no  reform  in  the  state  so  long  as  all  consent 
that  "  the  king  can  do  no  wrong."  The  very  right  of  reform  is 
renounced  in  those  words.  Xor  can  there  be  reform  in  the 
church  so  long  as  the  people  hold  that  the  priest  can  do  no 
wronty.  Therein  is  the  right  of  reformation  denied.  And  this 
accounts  for  the  lapse  of  so  many  centuries  without  reformation. 

The  right  of  reformation  was  repudiated  and  reprobated,  and 
the  spiritual  princes  went  on  degrading  and  debauching  the 


REFORMATION  IN  THE  CHUBCH. 


297 


people  and  none  dared  to  rebuke  or  even  mildly  remonstrate. 
Remember  how  boldly  at  the  Diet  of  "Worms  Luther's  enemies 
dared  him  to  challenge  the  authority  of  the  pope  and  council, 
and  how  cautiously  and  timidly  at  first  the  little  monk  replied. 
What  they  meant  is  that  the  right  to  reform  the  church  does 
not  belong  to  any  but  the  pope  and  the  councils.  Luther  had 
no  right  to  publish  or  hold  any  article  of  faith  but  by  their  con- 
sent. Luther  at  last  dared  to  rest  his  right  to  hold  truth  and 
resist  error,  in  conscience  and  in  God.  And  this  right  of  refor- 
mation is  now  guaranteed  to  us  all.  Again  and  again  it  has 
been  denied  since  Luther's  day,  by  Protestants  as  well  as  by 
Catholics  ;  and  Luther  himself  lacked  either  the  courage  or  the 
clearness  of  mind  to  follow  to  the  end  that  path  on  which  he  so 
bravely  entered  at  Worms.  He  at  length  denies  the  right  of 
reformation  beyond  a  certain  limit,  and  seeks  to  resist  and 
arrest  it.  But,  in  spite  of  all,  the  right  to  reform  the  faith  and 
the  morals  of  the  church,  so  far  as  they  have  been  corrupted 
from  their  original  simplicity,  is  at  last  conceded. 

And  let  us  consider  to  whom  this  right  belongs.  It  is  not 
simply  the  right  of  the  priest  or  other  ecclesiastical  dignitary  to 
propose  reformation.  That  perhaps  has  never  been  denied.  It 
is  the  right  of  any  member  of  the  church  to  denounce  sin  and 
error  wherever  it  exists,  to  bring  every  offender  to  the  bar  of 
God's  word,  and  to  undertake,  single-handed  if  need  be,  the 
purification  of  the  faith  and  the  reformation  of  the  church. 
Now  that  this  right  has  resulted  from  the  reformation  already 
accomplished,  the  progress  of  reformation  can  never  be  so  slow, 
so  difiicult,  so  costly  for  the  future  as  in  time  past. 

//.    THE  BULE  OF  REFOBMATION. 

A  second  result  of  reformation  in  the  church  is  the  estab- 
lishment of  the  rule  of  Reformation,  which  is  the  Word  of  God. 
To  have  the  right  of  reforming  the  church  without  the  rule 
according  to  which  the  reformation  must  be  conducted  would  be 


298 


BEFORMATION  IN  TEE  CEUECH. 


a  positive  calamity.  If  any  one  who  pleases  may  undertake  to 
reform  tlie  church  in  any  way  he  pleases,  th.^  church  and  the 
world  too  were  immensely  better  off  without  reformation.  The 
reign  of  the  priests  can  certainly  be  no  more  ruinous  than  the 
reign  of  fanatics  and  visionaries.  The  history  of  reformation 
demonstrates  the  one  rule  of  safety  and  the  one  condition  of 
success.  We  must  try  the  spirit  of  the  reformer  by  the  Word 
of  God.  "  To  the  law  and  the  testimony.  If  they  speak  not 
according  to  this,  it  is  because  there  is  no  light  in  them." 
When  the  Chinese  government,  awaking  at  length  to  the  exig- 
encies of  the  age,  resolved  to  build  a  navy,  they  purchased  a 
model  and  set  their  artisans  to  work.  Each  board  and  spar, 
every  rope,  bolt  and  nut  was  faithfully  fashioned  according  to 
the  pattern.  In  due  time  the  fleet  of  ships  was  finished,  each 
one  constructed  according  to  the  rule.  Now,  if  one  of  the  ships 
be  wholly  or  partly  dismantled,  the  same  rule  will  serve  for  its 
reconstruction.  So,  for  the  reconstruction  of  a  dismantled 
church,  the  word  of  God  affords  the  rule  and  the  model.  The 
church  must  be  reformed  as  it  was  formed  originally,  according 
to  the  Scriptures. 

Now,  the  early  reformers,  and  in  fact  the  later  as  well,  did 
but  imperfectly  apprehend  by  what  rule  the  church  was  to  be 
reformed.  It  is  part  of  the  glory  of  John  Wickliffe  that  he 
discerned  with  singular  clearness  of  mind  that  the  word  of  God 
must  bear  an  important  part  in  the  reformation  of  the  church. 
But  even  he  did  not  realize  how  important ;  he  does  not  clearly 
apprehend  as  yet  that  it  is  the  sole  source  of  authority  in  the 
church,  and  itself  at  once  an  all-sufiicient  warrant  and  an  all- 
sufiicient  rule  for  the  task  of  reforming  the  church  of  its  errors 
and  its  sins.  Other  reformers  of  his  time,  notably  Savanarola, 
scarcely  perceived  any  connection  between  the  reformation  of 
the  church  and  the  restoration  of  the  authority  of  Scripture. 
The  Florentine  reformer  looked  to  princes  and  civil  magistrates 
and  general  councils  for  the  church's  reformation.  Even  Luther 
adopted  the  word  of  God  as  the  rule  of  reformation  timidly  and 


REFORMATION  IN  THE  CEURGE. 


299 


only  partially  at  last.  The  Lutheran  Establishment  was  in  fact 
constructed  according  to  two  rules  :  the  rule  of  Scripture  and 
the  rule  of  tradition.  Its  polity  and  liturgy,  and  not  a  little  of 
its  doctrine,  hold  hard  to  the  forms  and  traditions  of  the 
medieval  church.  The  cost  of  a  radical  and  sweeping  reform 
was  greater  than  even  Luther's  intrepid  spirit  could  consent  to 
pay.  Such  reform  seemed  even  Lo  the  wisest  of  his  time,  nothing 
short  of  revolution. 

But  if  the  reformers  were  hindered  and  embarrassed  by 
their  own  imperfect  apprehension  of  the  rule  of  reformation, 
their  embarrassment  was  greatly  increased  by  the  prevailing 
ignorance  of  it  among  the  masses  of  the  people.  The  conviction 
that  some  reform  in  the  church  was  needed,  prevailed  generally 
in  the  days  of  "VVickliffe ;  it  prevailed  again  in  the  days  of 
Luther ;  and  such  public  conviction  of  the  need  of  reformation 
has  always  preceded  the  inauguration  of  it  in  any  country  or 
age.  But  usually  there  has  been  no  corresponding  conviction, 
or  at  least  no  such  degree  of  conviction,  as  to  the  means  and 
rule  by  which  the  reformation  is  to  be  wrought.  It  is  the  lack 
of  this  conviction  which  has  made  past  endeavors  at  reform  so 
difficult,  so  frequently  but  half  successful,  and  so  often  utterly 
abortive.  The  reformation  of  the  church  has  been  attempted 
sometimes  according  to  man's  wisdom  and  in  reliance  upon  the 
rule  of  human  reason  only,  and  well-meant,  and  often  heroic  as 
such  attempts  were,  they  could  not  but  fail.  Reformations 
have  succeeded,  as  history  abundantly  attests,  not  because  led 
by  men  of  genius  and  character,  however  such  leadership  may 
have  facilitated  success,  but  because  they  have  been  conducted 
according  to  the  rule  of  Scripture.  And  they  have  succeeded 
only  in  so  far  as  this  rule  has  been  followed. 

It  may  be  taken,  I  think,  as  one  of  the  results  of  reforma- 
tions already  accomplished,  that  the  rule  of  reformation  is  now 
generally  recognized,  though  in  a  much  greater  degree  among 
some  sects  than  among  others.  No  one  ventures  now  to  urge 
any  reformation  in  the  church  without  supporting  it  with  an 


300 


REFOBMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH. 


appeal  to  Scripture,  without  finding,  as  he  thinks,  in  that,  the 
one  warrant  for  his  work  and  without  insisting  on  that  as  the 
one  rule  according  to  which  he  hopes  to  bring  his  reformation 
to  a  successful  issue.  We  have  become  so  accustomed  to  all 
this  that  we  may  think  it  has  been  ever  thus ;  but,  in  truth,  until 
very  recently  it  has  been  quite  otherwise.  The  early  reforma- 
tions, indeed  all  reformations  hitherto,  relied  but  too  feebly  on 
the  word  of  God  as  the  great  rule  of  reformation.  It  has  taken 
all  these  years  of  reformatory  effort  to  demonstrate  that  the 
Bible  is  the  one,  perfect  rule  to  which  all  true  reformation  must 
conform.  Hence,  the  study  of  the  Bible  was  never  so  general, 
so  thorough,  so  reverent,  so  reasonable  as  now. 

III.    THE  REASON  OF  REFORMATION. 

A  third  result  to  be  ascribed  to  reformations  already  accom- 
plished, is  the  establishment  of  the  one  great  reason  and  motive 
of  reformation.  There  are,  of  course,  many  reasons  for  refor- 
mation. The  corruption  of  the  faith  and  the  morals  of  the 
church  results  in  misery,  in  ignorance,  in  shame.  To  rid  the 
church  of  such  evils  and  to  restore  to  it  its  lost  purity  and 
honor,  is  one  reason  for  its  reformation.  Then  the  divine 
requirement  for  soundness  in  faith  and  purity  in  life  among 
those  who  profess  to  be  the  children  of  God,  is  a  further  and, 
perhaps,  greater  reason  for  the  plea  of  reformation.  But  the 
most  potent  of  all  reasons  for  reforming  the  church  is  that  the 
purity  of  the  church  in  doctrine  and  in  life  is  the  great  condi- 
tion of  success  in  the  work  to  which  it  is  appointed.  The  evan- 
gelization of  the  world  is  the  mission  of  the  church.  "  Go, 
make  disciples  of  all  nations,"  is  Christ's  last  great  charge  to 
his  followers.  And  that  is  a  charge  which  cannot  be  fulfilled 
except  by  a  faithful  and  consistent  people.  The  great  impedi- 
ment to  the  world's  evangelization  is  the  indifference,  the  incon- 
sistency, the  unbelief  of  the  church.  Such  a  church  can  never 
evangelize  the  world.    These  stumbling  blocks  must  be  removed 


BEFOBMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH. 


301 


before  the  nations  can  enter  the  kingdom  of  Christ.  The 
reformers  have  all  felt  this,  in  greater  or  less  degree,  and  one 
great  motive  in  their  work  has  been  the  hope  that  they  might 
cleanse  the  church  and  so  make  its  witness  to  the  world  more 
worthy  and  more  effective.  More  and  more,  as  one  reformation 
has  succeeded  another,  this  has  been  the  hope  which  has  run 
through  and  supported  all :  the  purification  of  the  church  in 
order  to  the  evangelization  of  the  world. 

There  are  three  great  evils  in  the  church  against  which  the 
reformations  of  the  past  have  been  directed ;  superstition,  schism 
and  skepticism.  Now,  one  has  been  dominant ;  now,  another ; 
now,  all.  Luther  found  the  faith  of  his  age  largely  a  pagan 
faith.  The  old  pagan  superstitions  flourished  under  the  altars 
of  the  church  and  were  proclaimed  for  gospel  from  its  pulpits. 
The  conception  of  the  divine  character,  which  showed  itself 
both  in  the  creed  and  the  conduct  of  the  church  in  Luther's  day, 
was  a  grossly  pagan  conception.  From  such  a  God  Luther  fled 
in  utter  despair,  and  the  most  rapturous  moment  of  his  life  was 
that  in  which  he  discovered  that  the  God  of  the  gospel  is  not 
the  God  of  the  priests  ;  one  is  plenteous  in  mercy  and  in  truth 
to  all  them  that  call  upon  him  ;  the  other  is  cold  and  cruel,  an 
infinite  despot,  swift  to  anger  and  slow  to  remember  mercy. 
This  same  superstition  pervaded  the  conception  of  Christ  and 
the  way  of  salvation.  The  gospel  had  been  displaced  by  vain 
and  clumsy  superstitions.  This  superstitious  conception  of 
God  and  salvation  remains  to  some  extent  to  this  day,  and  finds 
utterance  in  the  creed  and  life  of  Christians.  It  is  one  great 
hindrance  to  the  spread  of  the  gospel  that  it  goes  out  to  the 
world  handicapped  by  superstition. 

From  the  beginning,  reformations  have  been  aimed  at  heal- 
ing the  schisms  of  the  church.  There  is,  indeed,  a  prevailing 
impression  that  reformation  is  the  great  cause  of  divisions  in 
the  church,  that  schism  is  the  daughter  of  freedom.  If  this 
were  true,  we  should  still  say  that  it  were  better  to  have  free- 
dom, even  when  she  bears  such  offspring,  than  not  to  have  her 


302 


BEFORMATION  IX  THE  CHUBCH. 


at  all.  But  schism  is  not  the  child  of  liberty.  There  was 
schism  before  the  reformation.  The  monastic  orders,  as  the 
Aiigustinians  and  Dominicans,  were  literally  often,  and  figur- 
atively always,  at  daggers'  points.  The  German  and  the  Italian 
sections  of  the  church  hated  each  other  with  perfect  hatred. 
Bishops  were  often  in  arms  one  against  another.  The  Reforma- 
tion did  heal  somewhat  these  schisms  within  the  Roman  church, 
or  at  any  rate,  taught  the  schismatics  the  policy  of  keeping 
their  strifes  secret.  But  if  any  think  that  the  Roman  church  is 
even  now  a  united  and  peaceful  household  he  is  grievously 
deceived.  Whatever  its  name  and  its  claim  for  unity,  it 
abounds  in  jealousy  and  strife  ;  its  union  is  one  of  policy  rather 
than  of  faith  and  hope  and  love. 

2^ or  are  our  Protestant  schisms  the  result  of  reformation  so 
much  as  of  reaction.  Divisions  have  come  from  arresting  the 
work  of  reformation  before  it  was  complete.  Germany  broke 
with  other  Protestant  countries  because  Germans  were  content 
with  a  partial  reformation ;  and  these  in  turn  broke  with  each 
other  for  the  same  reason.  They  reached  certain  conclusions, 
embodied  these  in  a  creed,  and  set  up  that  creed  as  the  limit  of 
progress  in  reformation.  Those  who  wanted  reform  beyond  the 
creeds,  were  branded  as  schismatics,  and,  indeed,  had  to  sepa- 
rate from  the  rest  or  remain  stationary.  But  reforms  never  go 
backward  and  never  stand  still.  They  must  go  on  or  cease  to 
be  reforms.  Hence  the  Reformation  proceeded  in  spite  of 
schisms. 

Skepticism  is  another  evil  from  which  reformations  have 
sought  to  set  the  church  free.  Now  skepticism  is  not  the 
modern  affair  so  generally  supposed.  It  is,  on  the  contrary,  a 
very  ancient  reproach  of  the  church.  Skepticism  abounded  in 
the  church  and  in  the  priesthood  in  the  sixteenth  century.  It 
abounded  in  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries,  beyond 
what  it  does  to-day.  Ours  is  a  new  and,  perhaps,  more  serious 
form  of  skepticism,  though  the  latter  I  doubt ;  but  the  thing 
itself  is  an  immemorial  evil.     And  every  true  reformer  has 


BEFOBMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH. 


303 


aimed  at  the  correction  of  skepticism  by  removing  its  chief 
cause,  ignorance. 

What,  then,  has  moved  the  reformer  in  his  assaults  on  super- 
stition, schism  and  skepticism  ?  What  has  been  the  main  rea- 
son and  motive  of  his  attack  ?  In  most  cases,  particularly  of 
the  later  reformers,  it  has  been  the  desire  for  the  world's  evan- 
gelization and  the  conviction  that  the  church  must  be  purged  of 
all  these  in  order  to  have  its  testimony  believed.  How  can 
the  church  rebuke  the  superstition  of  the  heathen,  while  her 
own  faith  is  full  of  it  ?  How  can  Christians  hope  to  reconcile 
the  world  to  God,  while  they  are  so  sadly  and  scandalously 
divided  from  one  another  ?  How  can  they  publish  the  faith  of 
Christ  to  the  world,  while  denying  or  distrusting  him  for  them- 
selves ?  Reformers  feel  the  force  of  these  questions,  and  labor 
to  restore  the  church  to  its  ancient  purity  and  unity,  that  the 
world  may  believe  its  testimony  of  Christ. 

And  so  far  as  reformations  fall  short  of  this  motive,  so  far 
as  the  evangelization  of  mankind  is  not  its  main  inspiration,  its 
force  is  spent.  If  any  aim  at  reformation  for  its  own  sake,  if 
the  goal  is  nothing  beyond  a  mere  orthodoxy  of  belief,  if  they 
settle  down  into  a  staid  conservatism,  an  easy-going,  time-serv- 
ing moderatism,  their  labor  shall  be  in  vain.  Any  religious 
reformation  which  does  not  include  and  exalt  the  evangelization 
of  the  world,  as  its  chief  and  ultimate  aim,  lacks  a  sufficient 
and  sustaining  reason  for  its  existence,  and  must  come  to 
naught  in  the  end.  The  establishment  of  this  fact  is  one  of  the 
most  conspicuous  and  indisputable  results  of  all  past  reforma- 
tory movements  in  the  history  of  the  church. 

IV.    THE  EEFOBMATION  OF  THE  CAJSIPBELLS  AND  THEIR 

COMPEERS. 

From  these  general  results  of  reformation  in  the  church,  we 
may  now  come  to  consider  the  relation  of  the  work  of  reforma- 
tion begun  by  the  Campbells  to  the  reformations  of  the  past.  It 


304 


BEFOBMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH. 


is  simply  the  relation  of  cause  and  effect.  The  work  and  plea 
of  Alexander  Campbell  is  the  logical  outcome  of  the  work  of 
Martin  Luther.  What  did  Campbell  do  but  apply  in  this  coun- 
try and  in  this  century  the  selfsame  principles  which  Luther 
applied  in  Europe  in  the  sixteenth  century  ?  Recur  to  the  prin- 
ciples of  the  Lutheran  reformation.  Its  first  and  fundamental 
principle  is  the  priesthood  of  all  believers,  from  which  come  as 
corollaries  the  doctrines  of  private  judgment  and  justification 
by  faith.  Campbell's  starting  point  also  was  the  priesthood  of 
all  believers.  His  first  grievance  against  the  church  of  his  time 
was  the  arrogance  and  intolerance  of  the  clergy.  They  had,  in 
his  belief,  largely  appropriated  to  themselves  the  privileges 
and  prerogatives  which  belong  alike  to  all  the  followers  of 
Christ.  On  the  other  hand  private  Christians  had  surrendered 
in  great  part  their  obligations  and  responsibilities  to  the  minis- 
ters and  were  too  content  to  follow  whithersoever  their  spiritual 
lords  might  lead  them.  Thus  the  church  had  become,  in  the 
opinion  of  Alexander  Campbell,  a  veritable  kingdom  of  the 
clergy,  whose  divine  call  and  right  no  presumptuous  layman 
might  question. 

It  will  not  be  contended  in  this  place  that  Alexander  Camp- 
bell's attacks  on  the  clergy  of  his  time  were  always  just  and 
fair,  that  his  charges  against  them  were  always  true,  and  that 
he  never  saw  reason  to  regret  some  of  them  and  to  abate  others. 
Nor  will  it  be  denied  that  his  conceptions  and  convictions  of 
clerical  pride  and  pretense  were  formed  largely  on  the  other 
side  of  the  sea  and  under  conditions  very  different  from  any 
existing  at  the  same  time  in  this  country.  But,  allowing  for  all 
this,  there  remains  amjDle  evidence  of  a  clerical  caste  in  this 
country  in  the  first  quarter  of  the  present  century,  which  this 
last  quarter  would  not  tolerate  for  a  moment.  The  ministry 
was  not  only  separated  from  the  common  lot  of  men,  but  set 
above  them.  In  dress,  in  manner,  in  the  very  expression  of  his 
countenance,  in  his  whole  bearing  among  the  people,  and,  above 
all,  in  his  claim  to  a  supernatural  call  to  his  holy  office,  the  cler- 


REFOEMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH. 


305 


gyman  seemed  to  say,  like  certain  of  his  sort  in  old  time  : 
"  Come  nob  near  to  me,  for  I  am  holier  than  thou."  Let  me  do 
no  injustice  to  the  dead ;  let  me  own  most  cheerfully  that  this 
clerical  conceit  was  not  universal.  But  it  is  the  simple  truth  of 
history  that  in  some  parts  of  the  country  it  was  general,  and 
that  its  inevitable  effect  was  to  create  a  clerical  caste,  a  Protest- 
ant priesthood,  who  took  away  from  the  people  their  spiritual 
birthright.  And  what  was  a  man,  who  believed  Martin  Luther's 
doctrine  of  the  priesthood  of  all  Christians,  to  do  when  he  found 
himself  in  the  midst  of  such  a  state  of  society,  but  to  follow 
Luther's  example  and  seek  to  reform  the  church  from  the  power 
of  priestcraft  by  proclaiming  anew  the  doctrines  of  priesthood 
according  to  Christ  and  his  apostles  ?  This  is  the  head  and 
front  of  Alexander  Campbell's  offending. 

The  principle  of  private  interpretation  which  was  so  promi- 
nent and  potent  in  the  Lutheran  reformation,  re-appears  in  the 
movement  begun  and  led  by  Campbell.  In  Luther's  time  the 
pope  and  the  councils  had  usurped  for  themselves  the  common 
right  of  all  Christians  to  interpret  the  Scriptures.  But  no  sooner 
had  Protestantism  wrested  this  right  of  interpretation  from  the 
pope,  than  it  began  to  transfer  it  to  the  creeds  and  to  the  clergy. 
And  so,  two  centuries  later,  we  find  the  Bible  again  chained  and 
sealed,  no  man  daring  to  go  contrary  to  the  creed  in  his  inter- 
pretation, except  at  the  peril  of  excommunication.  It  is  but  just 
to  the  authors  of  the  creeds  to  say  that  they  designed  no  such 
use  of  their  labors  and  many  of  them  would  have  deplored  and 
denounced  it.  For  all  that,  the  creeds  had  practically  displaced 
the  Bible  truth  in  the  seminary  and  in  the  pulpit.  In  the  pul- 
pit the  Bible  is  fast  recovering  its  ground,  and  even  in  the  semi- 
nary the  rule  of  the  creed  is  declining.  Half  a  century  ago  the 
state  of  the  case  was  altogether  different.  Then  the  right  of 
private  judgment  was  practically  repudiated  among  all  sects, 
and  no  reformation  would  have  been  worthy  of  the  name  which 
did  not  re-assert  and  maintain  it. 

The  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  played  an  important 

20 


306 


BEFOBMATION  IN  THE  CIIUBCH. 


part  in  the  work  of  Campbell  as  it  had  done  in  the  work  of 
Luther.  In  the  first  place,  the  Campbells  sought  to  correct  the 
perversions  of  the  Lutheran  doctrine  which  prevailed  at  that 
time.  There  were  two  popular  perversions  of  Luther's  doctrine 
of  justification  by  faith.  The  first  explained  it  as  equivalent  to 
justification  by  creeds,  which  means  that  a  man's  justification 
depends  upon  the  correctness  of  his  creed.  The  condition  of 
justification  is  consent  to  an  orthodox  creed.  Hence  the  creed 
was  continually  proposed  as  the  object  of  faith.  The  other 
exj)lanation  identified  faith  with  a  certain  experience  of  God's 
forgiving  grace.  Men  were  enjoined  to  seek  this  experience  of 
pardon  as  the  evidence,  if  not  the  essence,  of  acceptance  with 
God.  Opposed  to  both  of  these  views  of  justification  there  was 
taught  by  the  Campbells  the  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith 
in  the  person  of  Christ  as  the  Son  of  God  and  the  Son  of  man. 
Faith  is  not  the  acceptance  of  a  creed  nor  an  experience  of  any 
peculiar  and  mysterious  grace.  It  is  a  confiding  surrender  to 
Jesus  Christ  for  all  that  he  claims  to  be.  Evangelical  faith 
difiers  from  faith  in  general,  not  in  nature,  but  in  object. 

But  these  men  sought  not  to  correct  the  perversions  alone  of 
Luther's  doctrine  ;  they  stopped  not  to  correct  Luther  himself. 
Luther's  view  of  justification  is  stated  in  his  preface  to  his  com- 
mentary on  the  Epistle  to  the  Galatians  in  these  words  :  "  In 
justification  we  do  nothing,  we  work  nothing.  We  simply  suffer 
auotlier  to  work  in  us.''''  The  Campbells  and  their  compeers 
repudiated  in  terms  this  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith  alone, 
as  being  unscriptural,  and  taught  that  the  faith  which  avails  for 
justification  must  work  by  love,  that  it  must  be  an  obedient 
faith.  They  would  not  have  objected  to  the  doctrine  of  justifi- 
cation by  faith,  or  that  faith  is  the  great  principle  of  justifica- 
tion ;  that  only,  as  obedience  expresses  and  embodies  faith,  is  it 
acceptable  to  God.  But  justification  by  faith  alone,  they 
rejected  as  contrary  to  the  spirit  as  well  as  the  letter  of  Scrip- 
ture. Does  not  one  apostle  say  expressly :  "  A  man  is  justified 
by  works,  and  not  by  faith  only  ?  " 


REFORMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH. 


307 


There  is  one  principle  which  was  little  regarded  in  the  Luth- 
eran reformation,  but  is  conspiduous  in  that  urged  by  the  Camp- 
bells. It  is  the  unity  of  the  church  and  the  folly  and  sin  of 
schism.  Schism  was  one  of  the  minor  evils  of  Luther's  age,  so 
monstrous  were  others  in  comparison.  In  Campbell's,  it  was 
one  of  the  greatest ;  sectarianism  was  conspicuous  and  scandal- 
ous. The  sects  were  intolerant  of  each  other.  The  present 
truce  among  the  various  sects  is  a  recent  arrangement.  When 
Thomas  Campbell  issued  his  "  Declaration  and  Address  "  in 
1809 — which  is  nothing  else  than  the  plea  of  an  honest  and 
ingenuous  man  for  the  unity  of  believers — his  kindly  and  rea- 
sonable remonstrance  against  the  reigning  sectarianism  found 
little  favor.  His  reasoning  was  ridiculed  by  some,  resented  by 
others,  and  rejected  by  all.  But  both  his  acceptance  of  the  au- 
thority of  the  Bible  and  the  obligations  of  the  Great  Commission 
bound  him  to  put  in  his  project  of  reformation  a  plea  for  the 
union  of  Christians.  Division  was  at  once  contrary  to  the  Word 
of  God  and  the  great  stumbling  block  to  the  progress  of  Christ's 
kingdom  throughout  the  world.  The  duty  of  private  interpreta- 
tion and  the  consequent  obligation  to  urge  the  rule  of  Scripture 
on  others,  bind  us  all  to  heal  the  strifes  and  schisms  of  God's 
people  and  bring  them  into  a  vital  and  visible  unity.  We  can- 
not be  true  to  the  principles  of  Protestantism  and  justify  a 
divided  church. 

In  essaying  to  show  that  the  reformation  b^gun  by  the 
Campbells  is  in  a  true  sense  a  continuation  of  that  begun  by 
Luther,  it  is  not  pretended  that  there  was  any  conscious 
endeavor  of  the  Campbells  to  copy  Luther  or  take  him  in  any 
sense  as  a  model.  But  the  point  is  that  the  principles  of  the 
Lutheran  reformation,  so  far  indeed  as  it  Avent,  are  true  and  in 
strict  accord  with  the  principles  of  the  gospel,  and  must  there- 
fore, reappear  in  every  subsequent  reformation,  if  it  be  genuine. 
So  far  as  our  own  reformation  is  accomplished,  it  is  the  result 
of  those  that  have  preceded  it.  And  the  men  who  began  it 
and  gave  their  lives  to  it,  belonged  to  that  noble  order  of 


008 


BEFOBMATION  IN  THE  CHURCH. 


prophets  whom  God  calls  at  the  appointed  time  to  the  mission 
of  reformation. 

V.    THE  NEXT  BEFOBMATION. 

Did  space  allow,  there  might  be  another  paper  on  the  char- 
acteristics of  the  coming  reformation,  which,  like  those  already 
in  progress,  must  be  the  result  of  those  gone  before.  I  will  ven- 
ture to  name  two  elements  which  must  enter  largely  into  the 
next  reformation.  It  wiU  be  ethical  and  it  will  be  evangelistic. 
It  must  surely  be  ethical.  The  moral  teaching  of  Christ  and 
the  essentially  moral  aim  of  the  gospel  are  to  be  emphasized  as 
they  have  not  been  since  the  days  of  the  apostles.  The  church 
is  to  be  made  to  see  that  the  ethical  element  in  the  gospel  and 
in  Christian  life  is  essential  and  indispensable.  Church  edifica- 
tion is  only  another  name  for  character  building.  That  will  be 
a  cardinal  point  of  the  coming  reformation. 

And,  next,  it  must  be  evangelistic.  We  have  not  yet  come  to 
the  period  of  evangelism.  Some  faint  foregleams  of  it  we  may 
discern  in  the  distance,  but  the  era  of  evangelization  is  not  yet. 
The  next  awakening  of  the  church  will  be  an  awakening  to  the 
momentous  meaning  and  obligation  of  the  Great  Commission. 
The  next  revival  will  be  a  revival  of  the  apostolic  zeal  for  the 
furtherance  of  the  gospel.  Then  may  we  look  for  the  reign  of 
God  to  come  and  the  Father's  will  to  be  done  on  earth  as  it  is 
done  in  heaven. 


Geo.  Plattexburg  was  born  Marcia  25th,  1828,  in  Wellsburg,  Virginia. 
He  was  educated  at  Bethany  College,  graduating  in  the  class  of  Ibol.  After 
graduating,  he  went  to  Selnia,  Ala.,  where  he  read  law,  and  was  admitted  to 
the  bar  in  the  year  1853,  at  Cohaba.  He  removed  to  ^Mississippi  in  the  spring 
of  1854,  and  on  the  last  Lord's  day  of  August  of  the  same  year,  was  baptized 
by  Dr.  James  Deans  at  Prairie  ]\Iount,  Miss.  Six  weeks  thereafter,  on  tlie 
litli  of  October,  1854,  he  preaciied  liis  first  sermon  at  INIacedonia,  a  church  in 
Pontotoc  County,  in  the  same  State.  On  the  first  Lord's  day  of  April,  1855, 
lie  was  regularly  ordained  to  the  ministry,  James  A.  Butler  and  James  Deans 
constituting  the  officiating  Presbytery.  At  the  meeting  already  alluded  to  in 
Pontotoc  County,  he  was  appointed,  in  conjunction  with  Elder  Matthew 
Hackworth,  to  evangelize  the  counties  of  Xorth  ^lississippi.  Shelby  ami  Fay- 
ette Counties  in  Tennessee  were  included  in  this  Ciistrict.  Nearly  two  years 
were  given  to  this  work. 

In  September,  1^55,  he  was  married  to  Miss  S.  J.  Howard,  of  Lagrange, 
Tenn.,  by  W.  C.  Rogers,  now  of  Cameron,  Mo.  He  then  went  to  Colliers- 
ville,  Tenn.,  remaining  tliere  until  March,  1858,  at  which  time  lie  removed  to 
Little  Rock,  Ark.,  at  a  call  of  the  Church  in  that  city,  and  abode  there  seven 
years.  In  September,  1805,  he  accepted  a  call  to  Henderson,  Ky,  remaining 
there  until  July,  1867,  Avhen  he  removed  to  Dover,  Mo,  where  he  resides  at 
this  present  writing.  His  labors  in  the  ministry  have  been  mainly  in  Lafay- 
ette and  Saline  Counties.  During  liis  residence  in  Dover,  lie  has  ministered 
to  the  following  churches,  viz:  Dover,  Lexington,  AVaverly  and  Wellington; 
Richmond  in  Ray;  Clinton  in  Henry;  Lamonte  in  Pettis,  and  JNIarshall  and 
Miami  in  Saline.  He  was  twice  elected  to  a  chaplaincy  at  Jefferson  City,  to 
the  House  first,  then  to  the  State  Senate  the  following  year.  This  service  was 
rendered  during  the  Thirty-second  and  Thirty-third  General  Assemblies.  He 
was  one  of  the  original  projectors  of  the  Cliristiun,  published  at  Kansas  City. 
His  present  home  is  one  mile  north  of  Dover,  which  place  he  has  occupied 
since  September,  18G9.  Bro.  Plattenburg  is  not  only  a  preacher  of  recogniz- 
ed power,  but  wields  a  trenchant  pen,  as  well,  in  behalf  of  truth  and  right. 


(.I-.:)  ]M..'.TTK.\l!LUi 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH— HOW  BROKEN,  AND 
THE  CREED-BASIS  ON  WHICH  IT  MUST 
BE  RESTORED. 


GEORGE  PLATTENBURG. 

No  time  could  be  more  auspicious  than  the  present  for  a 
Restatement  of  the  Issues  between  ourselves  and  others.  It  is  a 
period  of  denominational  decay.  The  dissolution  and  resolu- 
tion of  existing  forms  of  religious  thought  into  their  elements,  is 
surely  and  steadily  going  on.  People  are  revising  and  re-cast- 
ing their  symbols  and  confessions  of  faith.  The  religious  form- 
ulations of  old-time  orthodoxy  have  lost  their  hold  very  largely 
upon  the  public  mind.  Says  a  great  journal  {Independent): 
"  This  is  not  the  day  of  denominational  vigor,  but  of  denomi- 
national decay.  There  is  a  survival  of  denominations,  but  noth- 
ing more,  sometimes  not  even  that.  Old  denominations  come  to 
an  end.  We  have  passed  out  of  the  denominational  epoch." 
"  All  Christian  denominations,"  says  Prof.  Briggs,  "  have 
drifted  from  their  standards,  and  are  drifting  at  the  present 
time.  No  one  who  has  examined  the  facts  and  considered  the 
historical  situation  can  doubt  it.  The  question  that  troubles  us 
most  is — whither?  "The  diy  of  eulogizing  the  divisions  of 
the  church  into  denominations,"  says  John  Henry  Van  Dyke, 
"has  gone  by."  Nearly  fifty  years  ago,  this  discontent  with 
existing  conditions  in  Christendom,  found  organized  expression 
through  the  Evangelical  Alliance.  This  body  of  most  illustrious 
men  gathered  from  all  civilized  peoples,  declared  that  they 
"  felt  constrained  to  deplore  the  existing  divisions,  and  to 
express  their  deep  sense  of  their  sinfulness  involved  in  the  alien- 
ation of  affection,  by  which  they  have  been  attended,  and  of  the 
manifold  evils  which  have  resulted  therefrom  ;  and  to  avow  their 

(309) 


310 


THE  rXITT  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


solemn  conviction  of  the  necessity  and  duty  of  taking  measures, 
in  humble  dependence  on  the  divine  blessing,  toward  attaining 
a  state  of  mind  and  feeling  more  in  accordance  with  the  Word 
and  Spirit  of  Jesus  Christ." 

This  clearly  defined  recognition  that  the  divided  condition  of 
the  church  is  not  "  in  accordance  with  "  either  "  the  Word  or 
Spirit  of  Jesus  Christ"  is  the  genesis  of  the  settled  drift  of  the 
age  towards  the  final  dissolution  of  all  human  creeds  as  bonds 
of  union  and  communion  or  as  standards  of  faith,  and  the  final 
wreck  of  the  denominational  epoch.  This  dissolution  of  all  hu- 
man formulations  and  indifference  to  them  invites  and  fosters  a 
calm  and  judicial  investigation  of  the  highest  problem  possible 
to  men.  The  subject  first  in  importance  to  the  unperverted  mind 
is  the  true  basis  of  the  church  of  the  living  God  ;  for  this  is  also 
the  basis  of  a  united  brotherhood,  each  member  of  which  is  born 
of  God,  Because  of  this  indifference  to  denominationalism  and 
its  parti-colored  tenets  on  the  part  of  many,  the  public  mind 
was  never  in  a  better  condition  to  hear  and  receive  the  divine 
truth  than  now.  "  People  are  growing  impatient,"  says  a  dis- 
tinguished minister  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  "  of  doctrinal 
and  ecclesiastical  dissensions,  and  the  tendency  of  the  times  is 
rather  to  a  broad  church  liberalism — sinking  the  differences 
between  hitherto  discordant  bodies  into  a  more  catholic  fellow- 
ship, if  not  organic  union."  These  conditions  we  deem  highly 
favorable  to  the  purposes  of  this  Restatement.  These  "  facts  " 
are  noted  as  characteristic  of  a  growing  tendency  of  the  present 
in  contrast  with  the  "  recent  past."  Not  a  few  are  constrained 
to  recognize  the  "  fact  "  of  "  a  growing  tendency  "  to  a  closer 
"fellowship,"  and  ultimately,  perchance,  to  "  organic  union." 

"We  emphasize  this  "  fact "  for  the  reason  that  the  title  of 
these  papers  calls  for  a  statement  of  the  issues,  as  between  us 
and  others  at  the  beginning  of  the  attempt  to  restore  the  gospel 
in  its  primitive  and  apostolic  forms,  in  the  light  of  present  ten- 
dencies. All  great  religious  movements  have  been  in  a  very 
large  sense  reactions.    Anomalous  as  it  may  seem,  the  great 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


311 


historical  forward  movements  since  the  inauguration  of  Chris- 
tianity have  been  returns  to  the  past,  to  old  truths,  to  primitive 
principles,  as  originally  revealed.  The  Lutheran  Reformation 
was  born  of  the  sacerdotalism  and  scholasticism,  or  as  Bunsen 
puts  it,  the  "  Aristotelianism "  of  the  period.  Great  abuses 
induce  great  reformatory  movements.  The  canons,  decretals 
and  philosophical  quiddities  of  the  schoolmen  were  swept  aside 
by  the  mighty  Saxon  as  he  strode  backwards  over  the  debris  of 
centuries  to  the  fountain  and  beginning  of  all  true  religious 
knowledge — the  divine  Word.  This  fact  is  in  singular  contrast 
with  that  recent,  yet  moribund  idea  of  development,  which 
evolves  all  forward  movements  of  whatever  kind  out  of  the 
bowels  of  the  race's  "  inner  consciousness." 

What  Luther  saw  was  a  vast  doctrinal  accumulation  gath- 
ered about,  and  obscuring  the  Word  of  God,  by  centuries  of 
vicious  interpretation,  maintained  by  a  venal  and  debased  hier- 
archy. 

DENOMINATIONAL! SM  AND  ITS  CEEEDS. 

The  Campbells  found  a  disrupted  and  dismembered  Chris- 
tendom ;  warring  sects  under  a  thousand  banners  of  discordant 
legends,  each  trained  to  the  call  of  a  partisan  shibboleth.  They 
found  a  mental  stagnation  and  religious  paralysis,  bred  and 
nurtured  by  a  blind  party  zeal ;  the  body  of  Christ  was  torn  and 
marred ;  and,  in  the  church's  outraged  name,  unholy  rivalries, 
bitter  animosities  and  unhallowed  w^ars  were  fostered  and 
waged  among  the  scattered  fragments  of  God's  people. 
Dissensions,  discords  and  wasted  energies  characterized  the 
time,  and  everywhere  partisan  zeal  spent  its  force  in  pushing 
forward  sectarian  schemes  of  "  no  pith  or  moment." 

Everywhere  the  One  Body  was  despoiled  by  unchristian  con-' 
flicts.  They  saw  denominationalism  violating  the  spirit  and 
letter  of  the  gospel ;  setting  up  antagonistic  interests  in  the  body 
of  Christ ;  claiming  legislative  functions  and  dethroning  Christ ; 
imposing  upon  believers  false  or  improper  tests  of  fellowship ; 


312 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


arming  infidelity  with  its  most  potent  and  dangerous  weapons  ; 
and  even  endangering  the  existence  of  the  body  of  Christ  by  per. 
petual  strife  and  the  multiplication  of  discordant  factions.  To 
attest  that  this  is  not  an  overdrawn  picture,  I  quote  from  a  prize 
essay  by  Pharcellus  Church  (Baptist)  and  published  in  1837, 
which  corroborates  these  allegations.  He  is  speaking  of  the 
vicious  uses  of  the  "  periodical  press,"  for  feeding  "  the  fires  of 
discord  among  brethren"  and  says:  "Not  half  a  dozen  col- 
umns in  any  religious  paper  can  be  read,  without  alighting 
upon  a  sentiment  or  turn  of  expression,  which  shows  its  colors, 
and  he  must  be  a  very  unpracticed  reader,  who  cannot  detect 
the  side  to  which  it  belongs.  Hence,  the  notes  which  assail  the 
public  ear,  under  the  professed  sanction  of  primeval  Christian- 
ity, are  as  discordant  as  those  wliich  echo  from  the  walls  of  a 
'bedlam ;  and  the  man  who  has  not  chosen  his  side,  finds  it  as 
difficult  to  determine  what  to  believe  or  not  to  believe,  as  in 
reading  those  papers  which  are  the  organs  of  different  political 
factions.  In  this  way,  the  taste  of  all  the  parties  is  catered  for, 
often  the  worst  appetites  are  cherished,  and  on  all  hands  the 
lines  of  distinction  between  Christians  are  made  as  prominent 
as  possible.  We  are  not  only  divided,  hut  we  have  organized, 
measures  to  perpetuate  our  divisions  and  to  foreclose  the  possi- 
bility of  amalgamation^ 

That  Protestants  were  living  in  open  violation  of  the  funda- 
mental principles  of  the  Protestant  movement  was  undeniable, 
and  in  their  departure  from  its  essential  ideas,  they  subjected 
themselves  to  Hallam's  criticism  that  "  the  Reformation  was  a 
change  of  masters."  The  condition  of  things  a  half  centur}" 
since  is  thus  depicted  by  Thomas  H.  Stockton  (Methodist) : 
"  To  me  the  wrong  is  palpable  ;  the  inconsistency  glaring ;  the 
discord  harsh  and  chilling ;  the  tendency  most  mischievous  and 
deplorable.  The  Protestant  theory  rejected  by  Protestant 
churches!  The  evangelical  theory  rejected  by  evangelical 
churches  !  The  Christian  theory  rejected  by  Christian  churches ! 
Protestant  in  principle,  popish  in  practice  !    Christian  inprinci- 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


313 


pie,  anti-Christian  in  practice  !  Unionists  in  principle,  division- 
ists  in  action !  One  church  in  name,  a  hundred  churches  in  fact! 
Christ  our  only  Master,  and  every  sect  under  a  master  of  its 
own !  The  Bible  our  only  creed — and  every  sect  a  creed  of  its 
own !  Private  judgment  the  duty  and  right  of  all,  and  every 
sect  distinguished  by  the  excommunicating  energy  of  arbitrary, 
authoritative  and  official  judgments  of  its  own." 

These  inconsistencies  and  dissensions  were  justly  referred 
to  the  religious  philosophizing,  the  introduction  of  false  methods 
of  inquiry,  unjust  canons  of  interpretation,  or  what  might  fitly 
be  styled  the  entire  absence  of  any  intelligible  or  consistent  sys- 
tem of  Biblical  exegesis  ;  the  use  of  false  and  improper  material 
in  their  religious  thinking,  and  finally  the  marked  tendency  to 
elevate  minute  and  indifferent  things  to  a  place  of  controlling 
and  supreme  importance  in  the  church's  faith.  It  was  held  that 
creeds  created,  fostered,  matured  and  perpetuated  a  condition  of 
things  w^holly  inconsistent  with  the  ardent  desire  and  prayer  of 
our  Lord,  "  for  the  enlargement  and  consolidation  of  his  emjjire," 
and  with  the  accomplishment  of  his  philanthropic  plan  for  the 
conviction  and  conversion  of  the  world  to  God.  They  were  held 
to  be  offensive  because  their  very  existence  assumed  the  inade- 
quacy of  the  Bible,  the  imperfection  of  its  legislation,  and  its 
insufficiency  as  a  standard  of  Christian  character  and  fellow- 
ship. They  were  held  to  be  in  rebellion  against  Christ,  as  they 
possessed  not  even  the  pretense  of  a  divine  warrant  for  their 
existence  or  use ;  to  contain  unauthorized  legislation,  "  unscrip- 
tural  and  extra  scriptural  statements,"  incorporating  as  im- 
portant, many  things  wholly  unessential  to  the  redemption  of  a 
single  soul ;  and  were  therefore  regarded  as  hostile  to  the  peace, 
harmony  and  unity  of  the  church,  and  adverse  to  the  conversion 
of  the  world. 

Centuries  of  mournful  history  vindicate  the  several  terms  of 
this  indictment.  Creeds  were  rejected  not  solely  because  they 
were  human  and  unauthorized  documents,  for  it  is  recognized 
that  many  human  inferences  have,  and  of  right  ought  to  have, 


314 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHUBCH. 


influence  on  the  lives  of  men ;  but  because  they  were  made  a 
bond  of  union  and  communion,  assuming  the  force  and  obliga- 
tions of  divine  commands  on  the  life  and  conscience  of  the  world. 
Mr.  Campbell  wrote  in  1824  :  "  The  history  of  the  church  for 
many  centuries  has  proved,  the  history  of  every  sect  has  convinced 
us,  that  it  is  as  impossible  for  any  one  sect  to  gain  such  an  as- 
cendency as  to  embrace  as  converts  the  others,  and  thus  unite 
the  allied  forces  of  darkness,  as  it  is  to  create  a  world.  Every 
sect  with  a  humq,n  creed,  carries  in  it,  as  in  the  human  body, 
the  seeds  of  its  mortality.  Every  sect  has  its  infancy,  its 
childhood,  its  dotage." 

After  sixty  years  come  the  fateful  words  of  a  great  Presby- 
terian journal  that  "we  have  entered  the  period  of  denomina- 
tional decay."  The  day  of  denominational  "  dotage  "  predicted 
by  Mr.  Campbell,  John  Henry  Van  Dyke  in  the  year  of  grace, 
1890,  declares  "has  gone  by."  Creeds  contemplated  in  their 
divisive  effects  were  held  to  warp  and  dwarf  our  thinking,  to 
give  unseemly  color  to  our  feelings,  to  breed  alienations  and 
foster  a  partisan  zeal  that  did  more  for  sect  than  Christ,  and  so, 
wholly  perverted  the  spirit  and  genius  of  the  apostolic  religion. 
It  was  this  that  led  Pharcellus  Church  to  say  in  1837,  "  There  is 
not  in  our  view  a  form  of  Christianity  in  the  universe  that 
answers  to  the  primitive  model."  It  was  also  held  that  the 
Word  of  God  was  so  exact,  and  determinate,  in  all  matters  of 
faith  and  conduct,  that  these  formulated  constructions  were  not 
only  useless  but  criminal.  It  was  enforced  with  great  emphasis, 
that  to  no  man  or  body  of  men  was  it  ever  given  to  arrive  at  in- 
fallible conclusions  in  their  use  of  revealed  statements,  and  that 
much  less  was  it  ever  given  them  to  impose  these  as  divine 
authority  upon  the  souls  of  men.  When  God  speaks,  exact 
conformity  to  his  words  should  be  the  law  of  life.  Who,  it  was 
asked,  was  empowered  to  say  that  any  matter  purely  and 
distinctly  of  revelation  might  be  in  any  wise  different  from  its 
precise  presentation  in  the  Scriptures  themselves?  Who  can 
place  himself  in  an  attitude  to  see  the  great  problems  of  re- 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHUBCH. 


315 


demption  in  other  lights  than  those  revealed  in  the  words  which 
" the  Holy  Ghost  teacheth?"  We  repeat:  it  is  not  meant  that 
legitimate  deductions  from  the  facts  of  Scripture  were  to  have  no 
controlling  influence  upon  the  convictions  of  mankind ;  but  that 
such  deductions  were  not  to  be  imposed  upon  any  as  standards 
of  faith  or  tests  of  character  or  fellowship.  It  was  also  held  that 
human  creeds  possessed  no  necessary  saving  power ;  that  they 
might  be  heartily  accepted  by  one  who  remained  unsaved,  and 
just  as  heartily  condemned  by  one  zealous  as  Peter  or  as  saintly 
as  John.  To  elevate  anything,  so  utterly  destitute  of  saving 
efficacy  as  a  human  creed,  into  an  authoritative  symbol  over  the 
souls  of  men,  was  justly  regarded  as  "  a  scandal  and  a  crime." 
For  this  reason  mainly,  creeds  were  rejected  and  held  to  be 
divisive,  heretical  and  schismatic.  Through  all  the  centuries 
of  their  history,  they  failed  to  keep  out  heresy,  to  quiet  a  single 
contention,  to  reconcile  an  enmity  or  promote  the  unity  and 
peace  of  the  church  of  God. 

It  was  held  by  an  eminent  Baptist,  still  living,  I  think,  as 
early  as  1837,  that  ''All  combinations  of  religious  thought  and 
practice  now  competing  for  popular  favor  must  be  dissolved  to 
their  elements  and  with  the  chemical  test  of  repealed  truth  the 
precious  in  them  must  be  disencumbered  of  the  crude  mass  of 
human  lore."  This  sentiment  has  been  growing  with  the 
increasing  years,  and  it  can  no  more  be  stayed  than  the  sea 
wave 

"  That  rolled  not  back  when  Canute  gave  command." 

To-day  it  is  said,  "  The  divisions  of  the  church  are  a  hin- 
drance and  a  scandal.  To  separate  from  our  fellow-  Christians 
without  warrant  of  Holy  Scripture  is  a  crime.''''  If  we  are  to 
accept  such  statements  as  that  made  by  Dr.  Hodge  in  the  Cen- 
tury Magazine  of  March,  1886,  there  is  no  such  warrant  of 
Scripture.  His  words  are,  "  These  various  denominational 
forms  of  the  living  church  are  all  one  in  their  essentials,  and 
differ  only  in  their  accidents.''''    The  "  accidents  "  of  "  denomi- 


316 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


national  forms  "  present  the  "  only "  excuse  for  tlie  shameful 
conflicts  of  the  warring  factions  of  "  the  living  church !  " 

After  the  same  manner,  Dr.  Van  Dyke  (Presbyterian),  in  the 
Church  Review  (Episcopalian)  of  April,  1890,  testifies :  "  It 
(denominationalism)  narrows  men's  souls  by  concentrating  on  a 
sect  the  sympathies  and  affections  which  ought  to  expand  upon 
the  whole  body  of  Christ  ;  and  this  effect  is  the  most  shriveling 
when  men  succeed  in  deluding  themselves  into  the  belief  that 
their  sect  is  the  body  of  Christ.  It  creates  false  tests  and 
standards  of  personal  piety.  It  mars  the  symmetrical  growth 
of  the  soul  in  the  knowledge  of  Christ  by  magnifying  certain 
doctrines  to  the  neglect  or  denial  of  others.  And  out  of,  and 
because  of,  this  criminal  conflict  and  ceaseless  strife,  there 
comes  into  the  hearts  of  multitudes  a  ceaseless  longing  for 
peace.  For  the  unity  of  Christendom — a  unity  that  the  world 
may  see,  and  be  convinced  by  it  that  the  Father  has  sent  his 
only  begotten  Son — is  to  day  a  longing  in  the  heart  and  a 
prayer  upon  the  lips  of  multitudes  of  Christians.  We  have 
every  expression  of  such  desire  as  a  prophecy  of  its  fulfill- 
ment."—  Van  DyTce  in  Ch.  Review. 

The  years  have  greatly  modified  the  bitterness  of  religious 
and  credal  denominationalism,  yet  even  so  modified,  its  dis- 
ciples do  not  hesitate  to  call  it  a  "  scandal "  and  a  "  crime."  It 
has  been  truly  said  that  "  had  but  a  hundredtli  part  of  the  zeal 
and  labor  been  directed  to  the  excitement  and  maintenance  of 
the  spirit  of  brotherhood  among  men,  which  have  been  employed 
by  individuals  and  sects  for  the  maintenance  of  articles  of  faith 
which  never  advanced  them  a  hair's  breadth  in  the  Christian 
life,  millions  would  have  been  brought  to  the  knowledge  of 
Christ  who  have  perished  in  ignorance  of  him." 

It  was  an  age  of  tyrannous  denominationalism,  in  which 
every  party  ran  up  to  its  mast-head  a  human  "  symbol "  as  evi- 
dence of  its  right  to  exist.  Those  declining  to  do  so  were 
branded  "  as  pirates  upon  the  high  seas,"  without  "  a  flag," 
deserving  neither  charity  nor  recognition.    In  this  state,  result- 


TEE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


317 


ing  from  the  reign  of  an  intolerant  creedism,  the  Campbells  saw- 
that  which  was  the  necessary  outcome  of  such  an  order  of 
things : 

1.  The  substitution  of  doctrinal  systems  for  faith  in 
Christ  ; 

2.  The  dethronement  of  the  "One  lawgiver"'  and  King,  by 
giving  to  purely  human  corporations  and  systems  legislative 
functions  ; 

3.  The  creation  of  false  tests  and  standards  of  faith  and 
fellowship,  and,  so,  the  consequent  exclusion  of  many  true  be- 
lievers from  "  the  household  of  faith." 

4.  The  organic  structure  of  the  church  wholly  changed  by 
the  admission  of  members  destitute  of  intelligent  faith  and 
incapable  of  choice  or  action  in  the  matter. 

This  condition  of  affairs,  so  unbiblical,  so  conflicting  and 
discordant,  led  them  to  a  re-investigation  of  the  nature  and 
structure  of  the  church  as  a  purely  New  Testament  concept. 
They  found,  both  in  the  express  statements  and  in  the  unvary- 
ing termiDology  of  the  Book,  that  the  church,  which  is  His  body, 
is  "  One  Body."  As  early  as  1809  Thomas  Campbell,  studying 
"  the  heinous  nature,"  "  the  ruinous  effects  "  and  the  "  fatal  con- 
sequences "  of  division,  was  moved  to  propose  the  "  Union  in 
Truth  amongst  the  friends  of  Truth  and  Peace  through- 
out ALL  the  Churches,"  and  this  he  declared  afterwards  to  be 
"  the  sacred  design  and  motto  of  our  commencement."  His  idea 
of  the  church  was  thus  formulated:  ^^TJie  CTaircTi  of  CfJirist 
upon  earth  is  essentially,  intentionally  and  constitutionally 
one.^''  This  was  maintained  upon  the  ground  of  definite  script- 
ural terms  and  declarations. 

There  is  one  God,  one  Lord,  one  Spirit,  one  body,  one  faith, 
one  baptism,  one  hope,  one  flock,  one  Shepherd,  one  Lawgiver. 
"Being  many,"  "we  are  one  body."  The  body  is  one,  as  also 
is  Christ.  Such  are  the  unvarying  declarations  upon  which  the 
elder  Campbell  grounded  his  postulate.  The  Campbells  and 
the  heroic  men,  and  "  a  glorious  company  "  they  were,  who 


318 


TEE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


stood  by  them,  steadily  proclaimed  these  things  with  a  sublime 
courage,  undaunted  by  the  wrath  of  man.  For  years  the  harsh- 
est scorn  was  heaped  on  them  without  measure.  Many  of  us 
who  knew  these  men  have  lived  to  hear  the  principles  enunci- 
ated by  them  spoken  in  words  of  no  uncertain  sound,  as  in  the 
following  by  Prof.  C.  A.  Briggs.  They  have  the  ring  of  our 
fathers  about  them : 

"  Christian  unity  was  often  on  the  mind  of  our  Lord.  The 
church,  built  on  the  rock  against  which  the  gates  of  hades  will 
not  prevail,  is  one  churcli.  The  kingdom  into  whose  gates  the 
disciples  are  admitted,  and  whose  king  is  Christ,  is  and  can  be 
but  one  kingdom.  Jesus  Christ,  the  true  vine,  is  the  source  of 
life  and  fruitfulness  to  all  the  branches.  Without  vital  union 
and  abiding  communion  with  him  there  is  no  spiritual  life  ;  and 
all  the  branches  are,  through  him,  in  organic  union  with  one 
another.  The  good  Shepherd  promised  his  sheep  that  '  they 
shall  become  one  floclc,  liming  one  Sheplierd.''  And,  accordingly, 
our  Savior  prayed  for  his  disciples,  '  That  they  may  all  be  one, 
even  as  thou.  Father,  art  in  me  and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also  may 
be  one  in  us  :  that  the  world  may  believe  that  thou  didst  send 
me.  And  the  glory  which  thou  hast  given  me  I  have  given  unto 
them ;  that  they  may  he  one,  even  as  loe  are  one.  I  in  them 
and  thou  in  me,  that  they  may  be  perfected  in  one.'  " 

Our  fathers  found  the  prevailing  condition  of  things  painfully 
opposed  to  this  clearly  confirmed  New  Testament  conception  of 
the  church  of  the  Redeemer,  in  its  basis  and  its  structure.  They 
held  that  the  church  was  not  "essentially  one,"  in  the  very  lax 
sense  of  Dr.  Hodge,  but  that  as  a  body  it  possessed  oneness  of 
organism.  On  this  ground  of  declaimed  unity  and  in  the  pres- 
ence of  multiplied  divisions,  they  maintained  that  this  condi- 
tion was : 

1.  Anti-scriptural,  as  expressly  prohibited  by  sovereign 
authority,  and  a  violation  of  express  command. 

2.  Anti-  Christian,  as  it  destroyed  the  visible  unity  of  the 
body  of  Christ. 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  GnjJRCH. 


319 


3.  Anti-natural,  as  exciting  hatred  and  strife  and  violating 
the  most  endearing  obligations  of  Christian  love. 

Such  were  the  positions  taken  in  the  "Declaration  and 
Address  "  written  by  Thomas  Campbell  and  published  in  1809 
in  western  Pennsylvania. 
* 

THE  WORK  PBOPOSED. 

The  Campbells  did  not  enter  upon  their  work  with  any  pur- 
pose of  adjusting  the  doctrinal  differences  of  the  time,  but  to  bring 
about  a  reunion  of  the  dismembered  body  of  Christ,  by  a  res- 
toration of  its  original  conditions.  As  we  have  seen,  the  sacred 
design  and  motto  of  our  commencement  was,  "The  union  in 
truth  amongst  the  friends  of  truth  and  peace  throughout  all  the 
churches."  This  should  not  be  forgotten  or  undervalued  in  any 
study  of  this  movement,  grown  into  such  vast  proportions.  It 
is  the  central  conception  of  the  whole  matter,  and  is  altogether 
worthy  of  the  great  brains  that  gave  it  birth.  To  this  move- 
ment there  was  harsh  opposition.  It  was  declared  impractica- 
ble, undesirable,  Quixotic  and  Utopian,  and  Mr.  Campbell  w^as 
described  as  "  the  Knight  of  La  Mancha  and  the  frenzied 
Swede."  To  all  of  this  in  reply  he  pointed  out  the  multiplied 
evils  of  sectarianism,  the  Biblical  teaching  as  to  the  unity  of 
the  body,  and  above  all  these  wonderful  words  :  "  Neither  pray 
I  for  these  alone ;  but  for  them  also  which  shall  believe  on  me 
tlirough  their  loord :  That  they  all  may  he  one;  as  thou. 
Father,  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee,  that  they  also  may  be  one  in 
us  /  that  the  world  may  believe  tJiat  thou  hast  sent  me;" 

Or  the  corresponding  Pauline  conception  :  '■''As  the  tody  is 
one,  and  hath  many  members ;  and  all  the  members  of  that 
body,  being  many,  are  one  body  ;  so  also  is  Christ.  For  by  one 
Spirit  are  we  all  baptized  into  one  body,  whether  we  be  Jews  or 
Gentiles,  whether  we  be  bond  or  free  ;  and  have  been  all  made 
to  drink  into  one  spirit.  For  the  body  is  not  one  member  but 
many." 


320 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


These  men  plunged  into  the  tide  of  opposition  and  "did  buf- 
fet it  with  lusty  stroke,"  and  lived  to  see  their  thought  the  rally- 
ing point  of  the  mightiest  men  of  Christendom,  of  all  denomina- 
tions. They  lived  to  see  great  modern  Christian  enterprises 
tend  to  closer  religious  alliances,  alliances  again  that  tend  to 
organic  union.  The  voice  of  to-day  speaks  on  this  wise,  and 
vindicates  the  phenomenal  prevision  of  the  founders  of  the  move- 
ment :  "  The  movement  in  the  direction  of  church  iinicy  under- 
lies, pervades,  and  will  eventually  absoib  all  others  ;  for  Christ 
is  sovereign  and  reigns  to  sanctify  and  glorify  his  church  in  the 
midst  of  the  world."  Prof.  Briggs  continues  in  these  weighty 
words  that  so  harmonize  with  the  bold  words  that  made  vocal 
the  vales  and  groves  of  Western  Pennsylvania  eighty  years  ago : 
"  The  time  has  come  for  repentance  and  reformation,  and  each 
denomination  should  study  what  sacrifices  of  unessential  things 
it  may  make  in  order  to  the  inestimable  boon  of  church  unity 
and  the  attainment  of  the  ideal  of  our  Lord  and  his  Apostles." 

Mr.  Campbell  announced  in  the  beginning  that  by  Christian 
unity  was  not  meant  a  federation  of  sects,  or  that  by  compro- 
mises or  concessions  there  should  be  formed  a  new  sectarianism 
on  grounds  differing  in  no  essential  feature  from  the  old  party 
bases.  To  carry  out  the  conception  of  the  organic  unity  of  all 
true  believers,  he  saw  the  necessity  of  a  return  to  primitive 
truth  ;  to  use  a  phrase  of  Mr.  Gladstone's,  "  The  re-introduction 
of  Christ,  our  Lord,  to  be  the  woof  and  warp  of  preaching  "  as 
its  "  pith  and  life."  Some  advocates  of  union,  hopeless  of  a 
return  to  the  spiritual  and  organic  unity  of  the  New  Testament 
church,  seem  to  be  content  with  a  "  federation," — a  consolida- 
tion of  forces.  Beecher,  in  a  meeting  of  the  Evangelical  Alli- 
ance, said:  "  We  want  an  alliance  ;"  Father  Hyacinthe,  with  a 
far  deeper  insight  into  the  nature  of  the  need,  said,  "  We  want 
an  organic  union."  The  priest,  and  not  the  preacher,  was  surely 
right.    I  quote  this  just  idea  of  the  case,  from  Prof.  Briggs  : 

"  The  only  kind  of  unity  that  is  worth  considering  is  organic 
unity,  or  church  unity.    It  is  possible  to  speak  of  Christian 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


321 


unity  without  thinking  of  organic  unity,  just  as  it  is  possible  to 
talk  about  any  subject  without  having  any  clear  or  definite  idea 
about  it.  But  just  as  soon  as  one  looks  at  Christian  unity  and 
considers  what  there  is  in  it,  he  sees  clearly  that  he  must  think 
of  organic  church  unity.  There  can  be  no  unity  of  organisms 
of  any  kind  witliout  organic  unity.  The  most  perfect  of  all 
organisms.  Christian  men  and  women,  born  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
and  under  the  discipline  of  Jesus  Christ,  find  their  unity  in  the 
most  perfect  of  organizations,  the  Church  of  the  Redeemer." 

The  points  involved  in  the  restoration  of  the  organic  unity  of 
the  church  might  be  comprehended  in  these  statements  : 

1.  The  restoration  of  the  spiritual  unity  of  the  church  on 
the  basis  of  conscious  and  deliberate  choice  in  all  its  members. 

2.  The  restoration  of  its  organic  unity,  as  in  the  Master's 
prayer,  that  all,  who  believe  on  him  through  the  apostolic  word, 
"  may  be  one,  even  as  thou,  Father,  art  in  me,  and  I  in  thee, 
that  they  also  may  be  one  in  us.'''' 

3.  The  restoration  of  its  catholicity  by  founding  it  on  a  uni- 
versal truth. 

ON  WHAT  GROUND'} 

In  view  of  all  the  facts  before  them  in  the  accomplishment 
of  their  "  sacred  design,"  the  question  of  questions  was  this : 
On  what  ground  can  this  restored  organic  unity  become  possi- 
ble? The  answers  have  been  many  and  unsatisfactory.  The 
many  competing  answers  might  be  reduced  to  three  general 
ideas :  Papal  Unity,  the  Pope  and  tradition ;  Protestant  Unity ; 
and,  finally.  Christian  Unity.  Protestant  dissension  and  discord 
have  long  been  the  taunt  of  Rome.  For  Protestantism  and  its 
creeds  it  proposes  Papal  Unity,  which  is  the  synonym  of  a 
debased  and  grovelling  intellectual  and  spiritual  bondage. 
Rome's  taunt  carries  force  and  rebuke,  and  is  bitter  in  its  truth- 
fulness. In  a  recent  article  of  Archbishop  Lynch,  the  purpose 
of  which  is  to  show  that  the  unity  of  truth  cannot  obtain  where 
the  private  interpretation  of  the  Bible  is  followed,  he  writes : 

21 


322 


TEE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


"  All  Protestant  denominations  feel  keenly  their  unscriptural 
position  on  account  of  their  divisions  and  multiplication  of 
creeds.  They  are  praying  and  soliciting  prayers  for  union. 
Our  Lord  Himself  prayed  that  His  apostles  might  be  one  as 
*Thou,  Father,  in  Me  and  I  in  Thee,'  that  they  may  also  be  one, 
and  'that  the  world  may  believe  that  Thou  hast  sent  Me'  (John 
17:  21)." 

Then  in  the  unfolding  of  his  theme  he  announces  : 
"  Surely  Christ,  who  came  to  teach  all  truth,  did  not  leave  it 
without  a  guardian  or  depository,  a  living  witness  to  all  men. 
Christ  did  not  confide  His  doctrines  or  truth  to  individual  men, 
but  to  a  corporation  which  He  calls  His  Church,  and  He  says  to 
all  His  followers :  'He  that  will  not  hear  the  Church  let  him  be 
to  thee  as  the  heathen  and  the  publican.'  " 

Here  the  right  of  the  individual  is  lost  in  the  claims  of  a 
"corporation."  Archbishop  Kenrick  says:  The  Papal  Su- 
premacy is  the  Rock  on  which  the  whole  edifice  of  Christianity 
rests  in  immovable  firmness ;  this  is  the  essential  center  of 
unity,  around  which  all  the  faithful  must  gather  in  harmony  of 
faith  and  obedience."  Archbishop  Hughes  tells  us  that,  "  The 
prolific  principle  which  has  deduced  such  a  harvest  of  creeds  in 
which  the  wheat  of  sound  doctrine  is  scarcely  perceptible  amidst 
the  tares  and  cockles  of  delusion — is  private  interpretation.'''' 
Such  is  papal  unity,  a  corporation  founded  on  Papal  Supremacy 
and  not  on  Christ,  on  tradition  and  not  on  the  Bible,  which  is  a 
closed  book  to  its  blind  votaries.  Papal  domination  means  the 
abolition  of  thought  and  the  total  extinction  of  liberty.  Its 
unity  means  death — and  Rome  is  semper  idem. 

PBOTESTANTISM  AND  ITS  CBEEDS. 

The  question  next  presenting  itself  is  as  to  the  possibility  of 
building  on  some  Protestant  creed  already  formulated,  or  upon 
a  selection  of  doctrinal  statements  from  the  many  already  exist- 
ing.   This  was  the  vain  dream  of  the  Evangelical  Alliance  a 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


323 


half  century  since,  when  it  proposed  "  a  federation,"  "  on  the 
basis  of  great  Evangelical  princij^les  held  in  common  by  them." 
It  was  held  by  us  from  the  beginning  that  no  mental  abstrac- 
tions, few  or  many,  that  no  doctrinal  schemes,  couched  in  parti- 
san dialects,  could  ever  be  common  ground.  To  these  there 
would  be  always  insuperable  psychological  difficulties.  Men 
are  so  varied  in  mental  endowment,  so  different  in  education 
and  mental  habits,  of  such  unlike  conditions  and  environment, 
that  it  would  be  impossible,  even  if  desirable,  to  have  unity  or 
even  unanimity,  on  the  basis  of  purely  logical  deduction. 

Such  basis  would  be  narrow  and  impossible.  Denomina- 
tionalism  is  what  it  is  in  name  and  nature,  because  it  is  based 
on  a  partial  conception  of  truth.  The  distinctive  peculiarity  of 
any  form  of  sectarianism  is  something  apart  and  different  from 
the  Apostolic  faith.  This  something  not  of  the  primitive  creed 
is  the  raison  W  etre  of  sectism.  For  this  reason  denomina- 
tional creeds  have  been  divisive  and  heretical  from  the  first. 
We  have  opposed  them  from  the  first,  not  solely  for  the  reason 
that  they  were  unscriptural,  but  because  schismatic  and  ruin- 
ous. Their  baleful  and  divisive  efiects  are  an  old  story  in  the 
history  of  the  church.  As  long  ago  as  the  fourth  century, 
Hilary,  Bishop  of  Poictiers  in  Aquitania,  says  :  "  It  is  a  thing- 
deplorable  and  dangerous,  that  there  are  as  many  creeds  as 
there  are  opinions  among  men,  as  many  doctrines  as  inclina- 
tions, as  many  sources  of  blasphemy  as  there  are  faults  among 
us ;  because  we  make  creeds  arbitrarily  and  explain  them  as 
arbitrarily.  And  as  there  is  but  one  faith,  so  there  is  but  one 
only  God,  one  Lord,  and  one  baptism.  We  renounce  this  faith 
when  we  make  so  many  different  creeds;  and  that  dixersity  is 
the  reason  why  we  have  no  true  faith  among  us.  We  cannot  be 
ignorant,  that  since  the  Council  of  Nice  we  have  done  nothing 
but  make  creeds.  We  make  creeds  every  year ;  nay,  every 
moon  we  repent  of  what  we  have  done ;  we  defend  those  that 
repent,  we  anathematize  those  we  defended.  So  that  we  either 
condemn  the  doctrine  of  others  in  ourselves,  or  our  own  in  that 


324 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


of  Others ;  and,  reciprocally  tearing  one  another  to  pieces,  we 
have  been  the  cause  of  each  other's  ruin."  The  voice  of  the 
intervening  years  hath  no  other  message  than  this,  the  story  of 
measureless  ruin  wrought,  the  sad  havoc  done  to  the  cause  of 
truth  and  righteousness  by  the  multiplication  of  human  creeds. 
By  their  framers,  doubtless,  Christianity  was  meant  to  be  pro- 
tected and  the  unity  and  purity  of  the  church  preserved  by 
them.  But  each  succeeding  age  amply  attests  that,  instead, 
they  have  disrupted  the  church,  and  filled  the  world  with  the 
harsh  clamor  of  contending  factions.  Fifty  years  ago  Mr. 
Campbell  used  these  words,  and  who  can  gainsay  any  one  of 
the  allegations  of  this  fearful  indictment  ?  "  Human  creeds 
have  made  more  heretics  than  Christians  ;  more  parties  than 
reformations  ;  more  martyrs  than  saints  ;  more  wars  than  peace; 
more  hatred  than  love ;  more  death  than  life ;  they  have 
killed  or  driven  out  all  the  apostles,  prophets  and  reformers  of 
the  church  and  world."  I  am  constrained  to  place  beside  this,  a 
brilliant  passage  from  Lord  Macaulay,  contrasting  the  perfec- 
tion of  Papal  organization  with  Protestantism,  which,  "for 
aggressive  purposes,  had  no  organization  at  all."  The  story  of 
the  failures  and  weaknesses  of  Protestantism  is  the  story  of  its 
creeds  and  schisms. 

"  On  the  other  hand,  the  force  which  ought  to  have  fought 
the  battle  of  the  Reformation  was  exhausted  in  civil  conflict. 
While  Jesuit  preachers,  Jesuit  confessors,  Jesuit  teachers  of 
youth,  overspread  Europe,  eager  to  expend  every  faculty  of 
their  mind  and  every  drop  of  their  blood  in  the  cause  of  their 
church,  Protestant  doctors  were  confuting,  and  Protestant  rulers 
were  punishing  sectaries  who  were  just  as  good  Protestants  as 
themselves.  In  the  Palatinate,  a  Calvinistic  prince  persecuted 
the  Lutherans.  In  Saxony,  a  Lutheran  persecuted  the  Calvin- 
ists.  In  Sweden,  every  body  who  objected  to  any  of  the  articles 
of  the  Confession  of  Augsburg  was  banished.  In  Scotland,  Mel- 
ville was  disputing  with  other  Protestants  on  questions  of  eccle- 
siastical government.    In  England,  the  jails  were  filled  with 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


325 


men  who,  tliougli  zealous  for  the  Reformation,  did  not  exactly 
agree  with  the  court  on  all  points  of  discipline  and  doctrine. 
Some  were  in  ward  for  denying  the  tenet  of  reprobation,  some 
for  not  wearing  surplices.  The  Irish  people  might  at  that  time 
have  been,  in  all  probability,  reclaimed  from  Popery,  at  the 
expense  of  half  the  zeal  and  activity  which  Whitgift  employed 
in  oppressing  Puritans,  and  Martin  Marprelate  in  reviling  bish- 
ops.'' 

These  are  grave  and  vigorous  indictments,  fully  sustained  by 
centuries  of  Protestant  history.  Who  can  hope  for  a  re-union 
on  a  basis  whose  divisive  tendencies  whole  centuries  proclaim  ? 

In  the  Century  Magazine  of  November,  1885,  in  an  article  on 
"  The  United  Churches  of  the  United  States,"  Dr.  Shields  (Pres- 
byterian) has  this  to  say  of  the  demonstrated  impossibility  of 
union  upon  a  human  creed,  even  in  the  case  of  kindred  churches  : 

"  If  history  teaches  us  anything  plainly,  it  shows  that  the 
attempt  to  organize  churches  on  the  basis  of  mere  dogmatic  dis- 
tinctions will  always  tend  to  schism,  rather  than  to  unity.  They 
often  exclude  more  Christians  than  they  include,  and  sooner  or 
later  go  to  pieces  in  some  fresh  dissension,  and  even  more  diffi- 
cult would  it  be  to  connect  together  conflicting  churches  on  such 
a  basis.  It  is  certain  that  none  of  the  leading  Protestant  confes- 
sions, not  the  Augsburg,  not  the  Belgic  or  Heidelburg  ;  not  the 
Westminster,  not  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  would  now  be  gener- 
ally accepted  by  the  American  churches.  It  is  doubtful  if  any 
of  the  great  Catholic  creeds,  the  Athanasian,  the  Mcene,  or 
even  the  Apostles'  creed,  would  afford  a  platform  broad  enough 
to  embrace  all  the  denominations  calling  themselves  Christians. 
And  still  less  could  they  be  marshalled  together  by  any  of  the 
new  made  creeds  of  our  own  time  and  country."  Then  speak- 
ing of  dogmatic  confederation  hitherto,  he  uses  the  words : 
"  Even  the  Presbyterian  churches  in  their  late  general  council 
could  not  reach  a  consensus  of  their  own  kindred  standards. 
The  Congregational  churches,  discarding  the  old  creeds,  are 
engaged  in  framing  a  new  one.    Dogmatic  confederations  have 


326 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


been  and  always  will  be  failures,  hence  the  decadence  in  the 
authority  and  obligation  of  dogmatic  statements."  Dr.  Shields 
continues,  "  AYe  discern  everywhere  the  signs  of  a  waning  inter- 
est in  the  mere  dogmatic  distinctions  which  have  long  hindered 
the  growth  and  assertion  of  a  true  doctrinal  agreement,  such  as 
the  decline  of  theological  controversy  in  the  New  England 
churches ;  the  disappearance  of  the  old  and  new  schools  in  the 
reunited  Presbyterian  church ;  the  comprehension  of  doctrinal 
differences  within  the  Episcopal  church ;  the  rise  of  broad  church 
parties  in  other  churches  ;  the  spread  of  open  communion  in  the 
Baptist  church ;  the  liberty  of  preaching  in  the  Methodist 
church ;  the  allowance  of  heretical  departures  in  many  churches 
to  the  point  of  scandal ;  the  searching  revision  of  creeds  in  the 
light  of  modern  thought  and  science  ;  the  disuse  of  old  scholastic 
catechisms  ;  the  decay  of  polemic  preaching." 

This  full  and  forcible  statement  clearly  marks  the  present 
tendency  toward  the  rejection  of  all  scholastic  formulations  as 
Articles  of  Faith,  or  as  matters  of  obligation,  and  teaches  that 
all  attempts  to  organize  '"on  the  basis  of  mere  dogmatic  distinc- 
tions will  always  tend  to  schism,  rather  than  unity." 

This  is  inevitable  for  the  reason  that  they  "  exclude  more 
Christians  than  they  include."  Pharcellus  Cliurch,  a  venerable 
and  distinguished  minister  of  the  Baptist  church,  writes : 
"  Orthodoxy  of  the  creeds,  being  thus  of  the  head  and  not  of  the 
heart,  cannot  be  made  a  test  in  receiving  members  to  the  churchy 
since  many  are  converted  without  knowing  a  single  article 
in  them.  Instead  of  the  unity  which  the  fathers  of  the  church 
sought  to  effect  by  creeds,  they  have  been  for  fifteen  hundred 
years  the  great  dividing  forces  in  the  Christian  brotherhood. 
One  thing  is  certain,  the  age  of  creed-making  is  past."  Thomas 
Campbell,  convinced  of  the  schismatic  and  destructive  tendency 
of  all  purely  doctrinal  creeds  from  the  Nicene  onwards,  gave  to 
the  Avorld  this  sentence,  deserving  to  be  written  in  letters  of  gold 
and  held  precious  forever,  "  Xo  inferential  truth  ought  to  have 
any  place  in  the  churches'  confession." 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


d27 


In  the  same  year  (1809)  he  also  used  these  words :  "  Noth- 
ing ought  to  be  received  into  the  faith  or  worship  of  the  church, 
or  be  made  a  term  of  communion  among  Christians,  tliat  is  not 
as  old  as  the  New  Testament;'''  and,  in  like  manner,  he  urged 
"  the  observance  of  all  divine  ordinances  after  the  example  of 
the  primitive  church,  exhibited  in  the  New  Testament,  without 
any  additions  whatsoever  of  human  opinions,  or  inventions  of 
men."  These  words  sounded  the  death  knell  of  the  cruelest 
tyranny  known  to  men ;  for  the  rule  of  opinionism  has  been 
cruel,  pitiless  and  strong.  They  were  fateful  words,  big  with 
mighty  revolutions.  But  these  words  are  not  valued  so  much 
for  what  they  deny,  as  for  what  they  practically  affirm,  in  the 
restoration  of  the  supernatural  facts  of  the  gospel  as  the  ground 
of  New  Testament  Christianity. 

There  was  a  radical  misconception  of  the  whole  matter  in  the 
widely  accepted  idea  that  religion  was  doctrinal  rather  than  his- 
torical. Under  this  view  the  entire  conception  of  Christianity 
was  changed,  and  was  wholly  dissimilar  to  the  primitive  form. 
Canon  Westcott,  speaking  of  the  absolute  and  historical  char- 
acter of  Christianity,  uses  these  words,  notable  in  a  period 
marked  by  incessant  doctrinal  controversies: 

"  Christianity  is  absolute  ;  it  is  also  historical.  The  history 
of  Christ  is  the  Gospel  in  its  light  and  in  its  power.  His  teach- 
ing is  Himself,  and  nothing  apart  from  Himself ;  what  he  is  and 
what  he  does.  The  earliest  creed — the  creed  of  our  baptism — is 
the  affirmation  of  facts  which  include  all  doctrine." 

This  point  was  clearly  discerned  by  our  pioneers,  and  their 
whole  work  was  to  lift  religion  out  of  the  domain  of  the  specula- 
tive reason  into  that  of  the  practical  reason,  basing  it  on  the 
wisdom  of  God,  and  the  power  of  God,  exhibited  in  the  facts  of 
the  evangels.  This  prepared  the  way  for  the  real  basis  of  unity. 
The  positive  ground — the  head  of  the  corner,  had  been  lost  sight 
of  in  the  doctrinal  accumulations  of  centuries.  As  Luther 
declared  the  preliminary  step  in  his  work  to  be  the  removal  of 
the  canons  and  decretals  of  the  age,  so  Thomas  Campbell 


328 


THE  UXITY  OF  TEE  CHURCH. 


declared  that  the  creed  of  the  church  should  be  "disentangled 
from  the  accruing  embarrassments  of  intervening  ages;"  and  fol- 
lowing this  came  a  positive  utterance  involving  the  fortunes  of  a 
religious  movement,  that  has  given  form  and  color  to  every 
phase  of  recent  thought  and  life,  viz. :  "  That  we  should  return 
to  the  same  ground  on  which  the  Church  stood  at  the  begin- 
ning.''' 

It  was  definitely  assumed  that  this  contained  all  essential 
truth ;  primarily,  that  "  the  Bible  contained  a  complete  revela- 
tion of  the  will  of  God  in  the  person  of  Jesiis  Christ."  This  rev- 
elation was  held  as  paramount  and  authoritative  in  the  final 
determination  of  all  moral  and  spiritual  problems.  The 
thoughts,  the  conscience  and  the  life,  were  to  be  held  in  unques- 
tioning subordination  to  the  will  of  God  revealed  in  the  Scrip- 
tures as  a  final  and  supreme  rule.  "  These  saj^ings  of  mine," 
and  not  "  inner  lights,"  "  intuitions  "  or  "  absolute  religions," 
were  to  be  the  final  standard  and  arbiter  in  human  conduct. 
"Doing  the  will  of  my  Father,"  was  the  sole  test  of  divine  Son- 
ship.  Prom  these  general  truths  were  deduced  these  rules  of 
conduct  as  the  "  sacred  design  "  in  hand : 

1.  The  repudiation  of  all  human  authority  as  to  matters  of 
faith — standards  of  morality  or  tests  of  Christian  character  or 
fellowship. 

It  was  held  that  nothing  not  essential  to  salvation  should 
form  any  part  of  the  church's  faith,  or  of  the  basis  of  its  union ; 
that  nothing  which  was  not  expressly  enjoined,  or  for  which 
there  was  not  an  approved  precedent,  should  be  held  obligatory 
upon  the  life,  heart  or  mind  of  any  human  being.  This  was 
fairly  grounded  upon  the  express  statement  of  Jesus,  namely, 
"Teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  Avhatsoever  I  command 
you."  This  precept  of  Jesus,  according  to  a  well  known  maxim 
of  common  law,  ej:cludes  all  that  it  does  not  f/iclude,  and 
fairly  contains  the  principle  announced  in  the  beginning, 
"  Where  the  Bible  speaks  we  speak,  where  the  Bible  is  silent  we 
are  silent."    These  words  in  the  light  of  their  intention  should 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


329 


encircle  the  name  of  Tlios.  Campbell  with  an  aureole  of  peren- 
nial glory.  That  they  have  been  abused  and  perverted  into 
narrow  and  base  uses  in  nowise  mars  their  unspeakable  value. 
The  sentiment  is  a  rebuke,  on  one  hand,  to  narrowness,  and  on 
the  other  to  a  latitudinarian  laxity.  In  matters  of  faith,  in 
standards  of  morality,  in  tests  of  fellowship,  where  the  Bible 
speaks,  we  speak.  It  contains  a  denial  of  the  right  to  exercise 
human  authority  in  the  church  ;  vindicates  the  right  of  tlie  in- 
dividual conscience,  and  asserts  the  supreme  authority  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ  as  the  Head  of  His  church.  It  denies  the 
right  to  any  man  or  body  of  men  to  give  a  human  conceit  or 
system  the  force  of  a  divine  enactment.  The  assertion  of  the 
principle  violates  no  right  of  the  individual  and  imposes  no 
check  on  intellectual  freedom.  In  all  matters  essential  to  salva- 
tion, we  are  limited  absolutely  in  all  our  teaching  to  what  the 
Bible  speaks,  and  to  its  exact  terms.  This  is  indubitably  safe, 
as  in  regard  to  the  matters  in  question,  it  is  the  sole  source 
of  our  knowledge.  This  statement  of  Thos.  Campbell  is  desig- 
nated by  Dr.  Richardson  as  "  The  formal  and  actual  commence- 
ment of  our  movement."  The  broad  reasonableness  and  large 
safety  of  the  principle  are  apparent  upon  its  face.  The  great 
fundamental  point  urged  at  this  juncture  was,  that  in  order 
to  Christian  unity  and  the  full  exhibition  of  the  gospel  as  a  con- 
verting power,  it  was  absolutely  necessary  that  the  Bible  alone 
should  be  taken  as  the  authorized  bond  of  union — the  sole  rule 
of  faith  and  practice.  This  meant  that  the  "Word  of  God 
should  displace  all  human  creeds,  confessions,  formularies  and 
systems  of  doctrine  and  church  government,  not  only  as  unnec- 
essary, but  as  the  fruitful  sources  of  strife  and  division.  It  was 
held  that  these  theological  systems  were  "  speculations," 
"  uncertain,"  "  derived  from  human  reason,"  "  the  offspring  of 
human  weakness  and  passion,"  that  they  formed  the  basis  of 
"essentially  human  religions,"  were  wholly  destitute  of  "regen- 
erating or  saving  efficacy,"  and  were  therefore  to  be  rejected. 
Dr.  Richardson  quotes  Thos.  Campbell  as  saying :    "  Noth- 


330 


TEE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


ing  was  to  be  received  as  a  matter  of  faith  and  duty,  for  whicli 
there  was  not  produced  a  thus  saith  the  Lord,  either  in  express 
terms  or  by  approved  Scripture  precedent."  Thus  were  men 
turned  backward,  from  cunningly  devised  theological  fables,  to 
the  simple  facts  and  truths  of  the  primitive  gospel,  the  sole 
source  of  saving  power  and  life. 

As  early  as  the  autumn  of  1813,  the  Campbells  uniting  with 
the  Red  Stone  Association  (Baptist)  expressly  stipulated  in 
writing  that :  "  No  terms  of  union  or  communion,  other  than 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  should  be  required."  Here  we  have  the  rich 
germinal  principle,  the  genesis  of  a  great  movement  destined  to 
mould  the  thought  of  centuries  to  come.  Herein  we  find  the 
sole  ground  of  combatting  the  Protean-shaped  skepticism  afflict- 
ing both  pulpit  and  pew  ;  the  sole  means  of  exj^laining  heresy 
and  schism  ;  the  substitution  of  fact  for  fable  ;  the  saving  power 
of  sound  words  for  the  manifold  perversions  and  corruptions  of 
human  ingenuity  ;  and,  so,  the  breaking  down  of  the  strongholds 
of  religious  corruption. 

Had  these  principles  been  recognized  and  held  in  practice 
from  the  primitive  age,  ecclesiastical  history  would  have  been 
spared  many  a  shameful  and  bloody  page  of  cruelty  and  hatred. 
Its  absence  has  given  to  the  ages  a  martyrology  of  unspeakable 
horror  and  pitiless  diabolism.  The  genius  of  slaughter,  through 
the  machinery  of  torture,  perpetrated  countless  atrocities  in 
the  name  of  outraged  religion,  whose  very  memories  blanch  the 
cheek  with  fear.  Chill  and  moldy  cells,  living  tombs  of  despair, 
penetrated  by  no  genial  beam  of  daj^ — the  stake,  the  fagot,  the 
rack,  the  thumbscrew,  the  horrible  devices  of  a  devilish  ingen- 
uity— were  all  the  unholy  creations  of  party  blindness  and  party 
zeal. 

"The  abjuration  of  human  creeds,  as  roots  of  bitterness  and 
apples  of  discord — as  the  permanent  cause  of  all  sectarianism  " 
was  set  forth  as  a  prelimhiary  step  to  the  purification  of  the 
church  and  the  conversion  of  the  world ;  and,  is  it  strange,  in 
the  contemplation  of  such  a  past  and  of  the  still  existing  domi- 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CEUBCE. 


331 


nation  of  human  creeds  that  Mr.  Campbell  should  have  urged 
this  with  such  a  singular  emphasis  ?  Again  in  the  same  year, 
(1847)  he  continues :  "  The  Reformation  for  which  we  plead 
grew  out  of  the  conviction  of  the  enormous  evils  of  schism  and 
partyisra,  and  the  first  document  ever  printed  by  any  of  the 
co-operants  in  the  present  effort  was  upon  the  subject  of  the 
necessity,  practicability  and  excellency  of  Christian  Union  and 
Communion  in  order  to  the  purification  and  extension  of  the 
Christian  profession."  Influenced  by  their  unscriptural  environ- 
ment they  were  led,  as  we  see,  to  the  rejection  of  every  thing- 
human,  QVQvy  private  opinion,  or  invention  of  men,  as  having  no 
place  in  the  constitution,  faith,  or  worship  of  the  Christian 
Church,  and  the  utter  repudiation  of  everything  as  a  matter 
of  Christian  faith  or  duty  for  which  there  could  not  be 
produced  a  thus  saith  the  Lord,  either  in  express  terras  or 
approved  precedent.  And  they  were  thus  led  to  proclaim  a  full 
return  to  the  simple,  original  form  of  Christianity  as  expressly 
exhibited  upon  the  sacred  pages.  The  purpose  of  these  men 
was  announced  as  early  as  1809,  and  was  declared  to  be  the 
promotion  of  simple,  evangelical  Christianity  free  from  all  mix- 
ture of  human  opinions  and  inventions  of  men.  Forty  years 
later  Alex.  Campbell  says :  "  Out  of  these  came  the  current 
reformation." 

Such  were  the  germs  of  the  greatest  religious  movement  of 
the  century,  which  to-day  we  see  giving  hue  and  shape  to  all 
religious  bodies,  and  leading  to  revisions  and  recastings  of  old 
beliefs;  nor  will  it  be  checked  in  its  resistless  progress  until  all 
"  ill  cooked  "  theologies  shall  be  swept  out  of  sight  forever  into 
the  graves  of  dead  synods  and  councils. 

2.    The  substitution  of  facts  for  doctrinal  statements. 

A  strange  misconception  of  the  true  nature  of  the  Gospel  of 
Christ  runs  through  the  warp  and  woof  of  every  epoch  of  Prot- 
estant history.  Christianity  is  historical  and  not  doctrinal.  Its 
commands,  ordinances  and  ethics  are  alike  based  upon  the  facts 
of  history.    There  is  nothing  more  singular  than  the  fact  that 


332 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


the  current  theological  conception  finds  no  place  in  apostolic 
teaching.  It  is  never  what,  but  always  in  whom,  do  men  believe? 
Even  the  most  cursory  examination  of  apostolic  and  primitive 
preaching  shows  that  simple  facts  made  the  burden  of  the  mes- 
sage. It  was  long  since  shown  that  the  word  doctrine  in  its 
current  theological  sense  has  no  Biblical  support,  indeed,  that 
the  word  nowhere  occurs  in  its  current  sense  in  the  sacred  writ- 
ings. For  instance,  in  Acts  2  :  22-32,  3 :  15  ;  10  :  38-40,  we  have 
a  very  few  simple  facts  of  history  presented  and  nothing  more, 
save  the  precepts  and  promises.  More  and  more  men  are  recog- 
nizing this  fact  and  are  drifting  away  from  their  speculative 
schemes.  Bearing  upon  this  point  Prof,  Blackie  {Four  Phases 
of  Morals)  uses  these  fine  words  : 

"  And  this  brings  us  to  the  second  important  point  in  the 
original  attitude  of  Christianity,  and  the  manner  in  which  it 
moved  the  moral  world.  This  point  is  the  historical  foundation 
upon  which  the  moral  appeal  stood ;  and  this  historical  founda- 
tion was  the  miraculous  life,  death  and  resurrection  of  the  Foun- 
der of  the  ethical  religion.  But  what  we  have  to  do  with  here 
is  simply  this :  that  these  facts  were  believed,  that  the  apostles 
stood  upon  these  facts,  and  that  the  ethical  efficiency  of  Chris- 
tianity was  rooted  in  these  facts.  Take  the  facts  away,  or  the 
assured  belief  in  the  facts,  and  the  existence  of  such  an  ethico- 
religious  society  as  the  Christian  Church  becomes,  under  the 
circumstances,  impossible." 

I  desire  to  emphasize  the  point  made  by  Prof.  Blackie,  that 
the  Christian  Church,  as  "  an  Ethico-religious  Society,"  becomes 
impossible  aside  from  the  facts  of  the  gospel.  Christianity  is 
not  an  ethic  ;  it  is  not  a  legal  system ;  it  is  a  gospel ;  and  facts, 
not  doctrines,  form  its  basis.  In  some  quarters,  where  better 
things  should  be  looked  for,  there  is  a  crude  and  shallow  conceit 
that  the  "  Christ- idea  "  may  remain,  though  the  alleged  facts  of 
his  career  are  fjibles  and  himself  a  "  fabulous "  personage  ; 
that  while  Christ  is  the  true  and  only  foundation  of  the  church, 
we  are  told  by  the  same  astute  authority,  the  "  true  founda- 


TEE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


333 


tion  "  may  remain  though  he  "never  existed."  "We  are  also 
told  that  as  to  "  teach  Hamilton,"  is  to  "  teach  the  doctrines  of 
Hamilton,"  so  to  teach  or  preach  Christ  is  to  "teach  the  doctrines 
of  Christ."  This  is  a  very  crude  and  mistaken  idea  of  the  Paul- 
ine declaration,  "I  preach  Christ  and  him  crucified."  The  predi- 
cate, "  crucified,''''  so  vast  in  its  import,  makes  such  a  conception 
forever  impossible.  Socrates,  Plato,  Hamilton  were  teachers  ; 
Christ  was  a  Redeemer,  "  whose  function  as  such  could  be  per- 
formed by  no  vicar  and  transmitted  to  no  successor."  Their 
personality  bore  little  or  no  relation  to  their  systems.  Take 
that  away  and  their  philosophic  systems  remain  intact,  in 
undisturbed  integrity.  But  take  the  personality  of  Christ  out 
of  Christianity,  and  only  "  outer  darkness  "  remains.  It  is  not 
without  my  "  doctrine  "  "  ye  can  do  nothing,"  but  "  without  we." 

All  of  the  offices  of  Christ  are  made  to  depend  absolutely  on 
the  historical  verity  of  the  facts  concerning  him.  His  Lordship, 
Rom.  14 :  9,  10 ;  and  His  Priesthood,  as  Mediator,  Heb.  9  : 14, 15 ; 
and  as  Intercessor,  Rom.  8  :  32,  find  their  reality  in  these  facts. 
Paul  places  them  in  their  necessary  order,  thus  :  he  died,  rose, 
sits  at  the  right  hand  of  God,  and  makes  intercession.  The  last 
depends  upon  the  historical  truthfulness  of  the  three  antecedent 
facts  alleged.  Take  away  any  one  of  the  three  as  a  fact,  and 
the  priestly  function  breaks  down.  With  us,  it  is  an  old  con- 
tention, that  the  church  has  a  personal  and  not  a  doctrinal 
basis — but  only  He  can  be  that  Personal  Basis  of  whom  the 
whole  content  of  the  phrase,  "  Thou  art  the  Christ  of  God,  "  is 
true.  To  preach  Jiim,  then,  is  a  vastly  diff'erent  thing  from 
preaching  or  teaching  Hamilton  or  Kant.  To  hold  that  there 
is  no  difference,  presents  a  strange  misconception  and  confusion 
of  ideas.  It  is  the  content  of  this  predicate  that  gives  spiritual 
significance  to  the  Master's  teaching.  The  resurrection  of  Jesus 
as  an  accredited  fact  of  history  gives  value  to  faith,  reality  to 
the  forgiveness  of  sins,  and  affords  the  sole  basis  of  the  assur- 
ance of  the  resurrection  of  the  just  and  of  an  eternal  life.  (1 
Cor.  15.)    In  the  presence  of  statements  like  these,  the  assump- 


334 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CIIUBCH. 


tioii  that  the  true  and  essential  foundation  of  the  church  may 
remain,  though  the  facts  in  the  life  of  Christ  be  "fabulous," 
affords  some  curious  mental  problems.  If  the  gospel  "  facts  " 
are  "■  fabulous,"  to  put  it  bluntly,  the  whole  thing  is  a  brazen 
falsehood,  and  unbelief  is  the  highest  reason. 

3.  The  destruction  of  denominational  tyranny  by  allowing 
the  largest  exercise  of  individual  liberty  and  the  widest  diversity 
of  opinion  whilst  demanding  unity  of  faith.  This  is  not  meant 
to  inculcate  licentiousness  in  Christian  thinking  or  to  indulge  a 
reckless  Liberalism  that  knows  no  standard  save  the  vagaries 
of  some  fancied  inner  light.  Liberty  is  not  inconsistent  with 
the  recognition  of  a  system  of  revealed  truth,  possessing  ulti 
mate  authority  in  the  settlement  of  all  matters  of  faith,  defin- 
ing the  whole  circle  of  Christian  obligation  and  establishing 
the  final  and  sole  test  of  character  and  fellowship.  We  recog- 
nize and  accept  the  word  of  God  as  that  to  which  all  appeals 
are  to  be  made,  and  its  utterances  as  ultimate  in  all  moral  and 
spiritual  questions.  This  position  is  a  perpetual  protest  against 
every  attempt,  of  whatever  sort,  to  hedge  around  infinite  truth 
with  human  limitations,  "an  impertinent  attempt  to  bring  the 
attributes,  qualities,  and  operations  of  the  Infinite  under  cate- 
gories suitable  only  for  the  measurement  qS  the  finite." 

THE  LAMBETH  CONFEBENCE. 

In  the  steady  movement  toward  unity,  from  the  days  of  the 
evangelical  alliance  until  to-day,  the  most  notable  event  is 
the  Lambeth  Conference,  of  1888,  whose  propositions  were  a 
modification  of  those  submitted  by.  the  House  of  Bishops  in 
1886.  Tlieir  proposal  and  its  reception  revealed  the  existence 
of  three  important  facts :  The  recognition  of  a  need  of  unity  ; 
a  growing  tendency  in  the  direction  of  a  closer  fellowship  ;  and 
the  utter  impossibility  of  union  on  a  mere  doctrine  or  polity, 
destitute  of  divine  warrant  or  saving  efficacy.  The  conference 
proposed  four  articles  of  Union :    The  acceptance  of  the  Old 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


335 


and  New  Testaments,  as  the  rule  and  ultimate  standard  of 
Faith  ;  The  Apostles'  Creed  as  the  Baptismal  Symbol ;  The  two 
Sacraments  ordained  by  Christ  Himself,  Baptism  and  the  Sup- 
per of  the  Lord ;  and,  finally,  the  Historical  Episcopate.  The 
Church  Review  (Episcopalian)  contains  a  symposium  in  which 
these  propositions  are  discussed  by  twenty  distinguished  min- 
isters of  the  leading  ecclesiastical  bodies  of  this  country. 

Barring  a  few  verbal  criticisms  there  is  quite  a  general 
agreement  as  to  three  of  the  articles.  We  would  say  of  the 
Scriptures  that  they  are  not  only  the  "  ultimate,"  but  the  "  sole" 
standard  of  faith.  As  regards  the  historical  Episcopate  there  is 
an  almost  universal  rejection  of  it,  both  as  unbiblical  and  unnec- 
essary to  be  believed,  and  as  possessing  no  value  which  should 
entitle  it  to  a  place  in  the  church's  confession.  It  is  said  that  it 
is  "vague,"  "  ambiguous,"  as  "it  might  be  interpreted  to  mean 
the  Episcopate  of  the  New  Testament,  or  that  of  the  age  of 
Cyprian,  or  that  of  full-blown  Romanism,"  and  that  it  "  needs 
to  be  defined ;"  and,  finally.  Dr.  Armitage  characterizes  it  as 
"  A  lower  than  the  true  and  only  possible  plane  of  such  infin- 
itely to-be-desired  re-union."  The  fatal  objection  is  couched  in 
these  words,  that  "  not  anywhere  in  apostolic  teaching  was  it 
made  a  conditio  sine  qua  non  of  the  being,  or  even  the  well- 
being  of  the  church,  and  that  we  are  not  saved  by  any  form  of 
church  government  but  by  faith  in  Christ,"  as  the  true  church 
may,  even  churchmen  being  witnesses,  "  exist  without  it,"  and 
that  it  ought  therefore  to  be  no  part  of  a  "  Basis  for  Re-union." 

It  is  wholly  inconsistent  with  the  nature  of  Christianity  to 
condition  unity  upon  a  mere  ministerial  function.  The  basis 
lacks  catholicity,  for  there  are  millions  ready  to  affirm  with  Dr. 
Buckley,  "  I  could  not  unite  in  an  ecclesiastical  organization 
requiring  as  a  matter  of  faith,  either  expressly  or  by  implica- 
tion, a  scriptural  or  a  historical  basis  for  such  an  institution." 
It  is  a  remarkable  feature  of  this  symposium  that  only  two  of 
the  twenty  contributors  make  marked  allusion  to  the  "  true  and 
on'y  possible  "  ground  of  unity.    Dr.  Armitage,  rem  tangit  acu, 


336 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHUBCH. 


touches  the  real  point  and  quotes  Alford,  as  saying :  "  This 
unity  has  its  true  and  only  ground  in  faith  in  Christ,  through 
the  Word  of  God,  as  delivered  by  the  Apostles,  and  is,  there- 
fore, not  the  mere  outward  uniformity,  nor  can  such  uniformity 
produce  it ;"  and  then  says  specifically  of  the  Lambeth  Confer- 
ence, "  their  plan  cannot  work  an  answer  to  the  prayer  of 
Jesus."  The  whole  trend  of  this  symposium  vindicates  the 
argument  of  this  paper,  that  whatever  is  not  essential  to  salva- 
tion ought  not  to  be  any  part  of  a  basis  of  union.  Strange  as 
it  may  seem  to  most  of  us,  the  Church  Review  makes  the  his- 
toric Episcopate  the  center  of  Christian  life.  It  is  claimed  that 
"the  Key-stone  of  the  Arch"  being  removed,  "the  sides  of  the 
arch  collapse  and  the  wliole  edifice  comes  down.  On  that  key- 
stone has  ever  been  inscribed  nulla  ecclesia  sine  Episcopo''' — 
no  bishop,  no  church.  Was  it  Horace  who  sang,  Risum  tenea- 
tis  amicif  The  Lambeth  plan  gives  to  an  "accident,"  the  value 
of  a  divine  creed.  To  set  aside  this  singular  claim,  we  have 
only  to  say  with  Dr.  Maun  (Lutheran) — "  We  are  not  saved 
by  any  form  of  church  government,  but  by  faith  in  Christ." 


THE  TBUE  GROUND. 


As  we  have  seen,  "a  preliminary  step"  in  the  restoration  of 
a  dismembered  church  to  its  primitive  unity,  is  the  "abjura- 
tion of  human  creeds  "  as  roots  of  bitterness  and  apples  of 
discord,  and  the  re-assertion  of  the  personal  conception  of 
Christian  faith — Christ,  the  confessed  center  of  his  religion.  It 
was  insisted  upon  from  the  beginning  that  the  sole  and  proper 
basis  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  to  use  Isaac  Taylor's  words,  is 
not  "  a  verbal  proposition,  but  a  reality."  This  foundation  God 
himself  laid,  a  foundation  tried,  precious  and  sure,  superlative 
in  its  majesty  and  grandeur,  strong  enough  and  broad  enough 
for  all  the  redeemed  of  God,  viz.:  Jesus  the  Christ  the  Son  of  the 
Living  God.  Our  mission  has  been  unique  in  this,  that  we  have 
been  the  only  people  whose  avowed  and  distinctive  work  has 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


337 


been  the  re-assertion  of  this  personal  idea  and  the  lifting  up 
again  into  its  central  position  of  the  person  of  Christ,  thrust  out 
by  speculative  schemes  and  doctrinal  systems. 

The  thing  sought  was  not  an  alliance,  not  a  unanimity  in 
opinion,  not  a  plea  for  the  union  of  sects  on  the  ground  of  com- 
promise and  concessions,  thus  forming  a  new  sectarianism,  but 
a  restoration  and  re-union  of  the  people  of  God  on  the  primitive 
ground  as  an  all  sufficient  foundation.  It  was  objected  that  the 
basis  offered  was  too  narrow,  and  involved  only  the  assent  of 
the  mind  to  a  proposition.  This  objection  is  not  true  in  either 
of  its  terms.  The  basis  is  not  the  mere  assent  of  the  mind  to 
anything,  certainly  not  to  a  proposition.  A  proposition  in  its 
logical  and  philosophical  import  is  the  simple  statement  of  a 
judgment,  of  an  abstract  truth.  This  conception  of  the  basis 
is  excluded  by  the  very  terms  of  our  position,  which  involves 
the  supreme  commitment  of  the  soul  to  a  person,  on  the  ground 
of  the  faith  of  the  heart.  We  hold  that  this  is  faith,  and  that 
"  nothing  else  is,"  and  that  this  faith  in  Christ  is  the  sole 
bond  of  the  union  of  Christians. 

Neander,  commenting  on  John's  first  epistle,  says:  "That 
one  divine  fact,  John  makes  the  center  of  all.  There  is  no 
other  test  of  true  faith,  no  other  law  of  Christian  union  than 
steadfast  adherence  to  that  one  fundamental  fact,  of  the 
appearing  of  the  divine  Redeemer.  Hence  it  follows,  that  pro- 
vided faith  in  the  one  fundamental  fact  be  the  center  of  Chris- 
tian life,  no  minor  diflerences  of  creed  should  be  allowed  to 
disturb  Christian  unity." 

It  was  held  by  Mr.  Campbell  (1825)  that  the  constitution  of 
the  kingdom  of  the  Savior  is  the  New  Testament,  and  that  this 
alone  is  adapted  to  the  existence  of  his  kingdom  in  the  world. 
To  restore  the  ancient  order  of  things,  this  must  be  recognized 
as  the  only  constitution  of  the  kingdom.  Of  receiving  citizens 
into  the  kingdom  he  says :  "Did  they  impose  any  inferential 
principles,  or  require  the  acknowledgment  of  any  dogmas 
whatever?    Not   one.    The   acknowledgment  of  the  King's 

22 


338 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CIIUBCn. 


supremacy  in  one  proposition  expressive  of  a  fact,  and  not  an 
opinion,  and  the  promise  of  allegiance  expressed  in  the  act  of 
naturalization,  were  every  item  requisite  to  the  enjoyment  of  all 
the  privileges  of  citizenship."  Mr.  Campbell  (1835)  in  a  book 
whose  avowed  purpose  was  the  "Restoration  of  Primitive  Chris- 
tianity by  the  union  of  Christians,"  and  not  by  a  "federation" 
of  sects,  announced  this  as  the  fundamental  ground :  "  Faith 
in  Jesus  as  the  true  Messiah,  and  obedience  to  Him  as  our  Law- 
giver and  King,  the  only  test  of  Christian  character  and  the 
ONLY  BOND  of  Christian  union,  communion  and  co-operation ; 
irrespective  of  all  creeds,  opinions,  commandments  and  tradi- 
tions of  men.''''    The  capitals  and  italics  are  Mr.  Campbell's. 

The  developments  of  more  than  half  a  century  have  added 
nothing  to  this  luminous  statement.  To  its  simplicity,  fullness 
and  absolute  comprehensiveness  nothing  can  be  added.  Accur- 
ately, Mr.  Campbell  made  this  record  just  eighty  years  ago, 
that  is,  in  1810,  as  he  himself  avers.  The  advocacy  of  Chris- 
tian union  at  that  day  was  regarded  as  the  wildest  religious 
Quixotism.  We  now  see  men  assuming  as  a  seeming  novelty, 
the  position  occupied  \)Y  Mr.  Campbell  eighty  years  agone.  By 
so  much  did  he  lead  the  age  in  which  he  lived.  Once  more : 
"The  only  apostolic  and  divine  confession  which  God,  the 
Father  of  all,  has  laid  for  the  church,  and  that  on  which  Jesus 
himself  said  he  would  build,  is  the  sublime  and  supreme  propo- 
sition :  That  Jesus  of  Nazareth  is  the  Messiah,  the  Son  or 
THE  LIVING  God.  This  is  the  peculiarity  of  the  Christian  sys- 
tem, its  specific  attribute." 

It  was  urged  with  great  emphasis  and  force,  that  the  consti- 
tution of  the  primitive  church  should  be  the  constitution  and 
laws  of  the  restored  church ;  and  as  the  church  was  once  united 
and  complete  without  any  creed  in  the  modern  sense  either  in 
form  or  substance,  it  was  held  that  there  should  be  an  abandon- 
ment of  these  summaries,  together  with  the  new  and  corrupt 
nomenclature  fostered  by  them,  this  giving  place  to  the  exact 
forms  of  the  inspired  text.    In  the  Christian  Baptist  and  after- 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


339 


wards  in  the  Millennial  Harbinger,  Mr.  Campbell  stated  and 
elaborated  with  all  the  force  of  his  marvellously  endowed  intel- 
lect, the  two  following  propositions  : 

1.  "  That  the  union  of  Ghrlstians  is  essential  to  the  con- 
nersion  of  the  world.'''' 

To-day  it  is  everywhere  conceded  that  this  work  is  hindered 
by  the  dissensions  and  distractions  of  the  church,  and  that  her 
success  is  retarded  by  the  dissipation  of  her  energies  and 
resources  in  party  schemes.  The  great  Master  saw  the  neces- 
sary relation  of  these  things,  hence,  the  prayer,  "That  they  may 
be  ONE  in  us,  that  the  world  may  believe  that  thou  hast  sent 
me." 

2.  "  That  the  word  or  testimony  of  the  apostles  is  of  itself 
all  sufficient  and  alone  sufficient  for  the  union  of  all  Chris- 
tians.^^ 

Of  the  truth  of  this  there  can  be  no  doubt  in  any  enlight- 
ened mind.  To  deny  it  would  be  to  affirm  the  incompleteness 
of  the  Holy  "Word  and  its  inadequacy  to  perform  that  where- 
unto  it  was  ordained — as  the  power  of  God  and  the  wisdom  of 
God.  Denominationalism  "fills  the  earth  with  feeble  churches 
and  half-supported  ministers  and  wastes  in  sectarian  rivalries 
what  ought  to  go  in  evangelizing  the  world,"  is  the  testimony  of 
a  distinguished  denominational  minister.  If  these  things  are 
true,  can  there  be  a  single  doubt  as  to  the  manifest  duty  of  the 
bodies  claiming  to  be  churches  of  Christ?  Mr.  Campbell, 
recognizing  the  duty,  and  with  his  clear  intellectual  vision 
grasping  the  vast  purpose  of  restoration  in  all  its  details,  gave 
this  splendid  grouping  of  its  elements  : 

Let  the  bible  &e  substituted  for  all  human  creeds  ;  facts 
for  definitions  ;  things,  for  words;  faith, /or  speculation; 
UNITY  OP  faith, /or  unity  of  opinion  ;  the  positive  command- 
ments OP  GOD,  for  human  legislation  and  tradition  ;  piety,  for 
ceremony  ;  yioiiAJATY ,  for  partisan  zeal  \  the  practice  op  eeli- 
GiON  for  the  mere  profession  of  it,  and  the  work  is  done. 

This  brings  us  to  what  we  deem  the  distinctive  mark  above 


340 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


all  others  of  our  preaching  and  our  mission,  viz.:  the  comprehen- 
sion and  expression  of  the  creed  of  the  church  in  one  truly  bib- 
lical formula — one  fact  fundamental  to  Christianity,  to-wit : 

JESUS  IS  THE  CUBIST. 

The  original  and  apostolic  church  knew  no  other  creed  but 
this.  Says  Neander :  "  At  the  beginning,  when  it  was  import- 
ant that  the  church  should  rapidly  extend  itself,  those  who  con- 
fessed their  belief  in  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  (among  Jews)  or  their 
belief  in  the  one  God  and  in  Jesus  as  the  Messiah  (among  the 
Gentiles),  were  immediately  baptized,  as  appears  from  the  New 
Testament.  Let  us  recollect  that  the  faith  in  Jesus  as  the  Mes- 
siah was  the  fundamental  doctrine  on  which  the  whole  structure 
of  the  church  arose.  Accordingly  tlie  first  Christian  church 
was  formed  of  very  heterogeneous  materials.  It  was  composed 
of  such  as  differed  from  other  Jews  only  in  the  acknowledgment 
of  Jesus  as  the  Messiah."  If  this  simple  confession  of  the  Mes- 
siahship  of  Jesus  did  gather  and  fuse  the  "heterogeneous  mate- 
rials," and  widely  discordant  elements  of  the  ancient  world  into 
one  perfectly  articulated  and  compacted  body,  why  is  it  not  a 
sufficient  foundation  or  creed  now?  Are  we  more  differentiated 
than  they,  or  has  the  Gospel  of  the  Messiahship  lost  its  power  ? 
The  distinctive  mark  of  the  ancient  Christian  was  that  he  had 
made  this  confession.  This  was  true  of  all  those  in  the  body, 
for  whose  sanctification  and  glorification  Jesus  prayed ;  it  was 
necessarily  true — "that  they  believe  on  Me,  through  their  word." 
The  facts  of  the  case  assume  that  this  creed  was  intelligible, 
comprehending  all  necessary  truth,  and  having  inherent  saving 
efficacy;  broad  enough  for  all,  and  therefore  catholic  ;  enunciated 
as  such  by  the  Master,  and  therefore  authoritative.  The  dog- 
matic creeds  are  largely  unintelligible,  contain  only  partial 
truth,  are  absolutely  destitute  of  saving  power,  are  narrow  and 
sectarian,  and  are  not  only  without  any  vestige  of  divine 
authority,  but  against  it,  and  do  despite  to  the  whole  spirit  and 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


341 


Structure  of  the  Christian  religion.  We  went  to  the  world  with 
only  this  and  nothing  beside  it,  not  asking  men  to  accept  some- 
thing about  Him,  but  asking  them  to  believe  and  trust  and  hope 
in  Him,  even  in  Him  in  whom  God  was  to  realize  all  his 
gracious  purpose;  in  whom  all  prophecies  were  fulfilled;  in 
whom  every  type  and  shadow  and  institution  of  the  divine 
order  revealed  through  ages  met ;  and  in  whom  center  all  his- 
tory, all  philosophies,  all  civilizations,  all  growth.  For  doing 
this  we  were  treated  in  former  days  with  harshest  scorn,  and 
ridiculed  as  being  believers  in  nothing  but  one  fact,  and  that 
one,  too,  a  fact  which  everybody  believed. 

What  do  we  see  to-day?  The  creeds  begotten  of  human 
ingenuity  and  heated  controversy  are  everywhere  disregarded  ; 
their  authority  is  repudiated;  their  obligations  denied;  their 
lack  of  divine  sanction  conceded,  and  their  destitution  of  saving 
power  acknowledged ;  that  they  bring  division  and  not  unity  is 
granted ;  that  they  exclude  more  Christians  than  they  include  is 
everywhere  known  and  felt ;  that  they  are  only  rubbish  is 
everywhere  indicated  by  the  movement  of  religious  thought,  a 
movement  that  will  not  be  stayed.  Out  of  this  rubbish,  accu- 
mulated about  the  temple  of  God  through  ages,  the  church  is 
lifting  the  corner-stone,  and  setting  it  again  in  its  own  place  in 
the  living  temple  of  the  living  God. 

Dr.  Phillips  Brooks  (Episcopalian),  one  of  the  very  ablest  of 
American  preachers,  discussing  the  question  of  the  "  Pulpit  and 
Popular  Skepticism,"  in  the  Princeton  Review,  discourses  in 
regard  to  the  point  now  in  hand  in  this  wise :  "I  have  already, 
in  a  word,  shown  what  might  be  the  power  of  that  simplicity 
and  unity  by  which  the  Gospel  can  become  effective.  It  is  the 
Person  of  Christ.  If  there  has  been  one  change,  which  above 
all  others  has  altered  our  modern  Christianity  from  what  was 
the  Christian  religion  in  apostolic  times,  I  think  beyond  all 
doubt  it  must  be  this,  the  substitution  of  a  belief  in  doctrines 
for  loyalty  to  a  Person  as  the  essence  and  test  of  Christian  life. 
And  if  there  be  a  revival  which  is  needed  to  make  Christianity 


o42 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHUECH. 


Strong  against  the  enemies  which  beset  her,  and  clear  in  the 
sight  of  multitudes  who  are  bewildered  about  her,  it  certainly 
must  be  the  recarnation  of  her  personal  idea,  the  re-assertion  of 
the  fact  that  Christ  is  Christianity,  and  that,  not  to  hold  this  or 
that  concerning  Him  as  true,  but  to  follow  him  with  love  and 
that  degree  of  knowledge  of  Him  which  has  been  given  us,  is  to 
be  a  Christian.  There  are,  then,  two  distinct  ideas  of  Chris- 
tianity;  the  one  magnifies  doctrine,  and  its  great  sin  is  heresy; 
the  other  magnifies  obedience,  and  its  great  sin  is  disobedience. 
The  first  enthrones  a  creed ;  the  second  enthrones  a  person.  Of 
the  second  sort,  not  of  the  first,  is  the  Christianity  of  the  New 
Testament;  of  the  first,  and  not  of  the  second,  has  been  a  very 
large  part  of  the  Christianity  of  Christendom."  I  wish  you  to 
note  carefully  the  leading  declarations  of  this  paragraph.  It 
asserts  the  departure  of  the  church  from  the  apostolic  concep- 
tion ;  that  this  departure  was  induced  and  perpetuated  by  the 
substitution  of  a  belief  in  doctrines  for  trust  in  Christ  and  obe- 
dience to  him ;  that  a  revival  is  needed  as  against  the  church's 
enemies,  and  for  the  delivery  of  those  bewildered  by  apostasy ; 
and  that  this  can  be  elfected  only  by  the  re-assertion  of  the  primi- 
tive Christianity  which  enthroned  a  Person  and  not  a  creed — by 
preaching  that  Christ  is  Christianity.  How  persistently  we 
have  declared  these  things  from  the  beginning,  through  evil  and 
good  report,  is  known  to  all  advised  in  these  matters.  We  did 
not  reject  creeds  because  they  were  necessarily  false,  for  they 
were  not  all  that,  but  because  they  were  human  substitutes  for 
the  Person  of  Christ,  and  because  this  substitution  has  radically 
changed  the  entire  structure  and  essence  of  the  Christianity  of 
the  Apostles;  "has  altered,"  says  Dr.  Brooks,  "our  modern 
Christianity  from  what  the  Christian  religion  was  in  apostolic 
times."  We  aimed  to  return  to  the  original  personal  basis  ;  to 
primitive  truth  and  apostolic  methods.  We  have  lived  to  see 
the  correctness  of  our  position  vindicated  by  the  utterances  of 
the  great  leaders  of  living  thought  everywhere.  I  wish  you  now 
to  hear  in  maintenance  of  this  assertion  one  of  the  most  distin- 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


343 


guished  scholars,  philosophers  and  theologians  of  our  day  and 
country,  viz : — Mark  Hopkins.  Bear  in  mind  that  he  is  a  Pres- 
byterian, and  that  I  take  the  extract  given  below  from  his  paper 
on  "Faith,"  which  appeared,  I  think,  in  the  Princeton  Review  in 
1879.  Searching  for  some  principle  so  related  to  the  three  great 
constituents  of  our  nature,  the  intellect,  the  sensibility  and  the 
will,  that  it  may  involve  the  action  of  the  first,  the  affections  of 
the  second,  and  the  active  energy  of  the  third,  he  says  :  "  Such 
a  principle  we  find  in  confidence  in  a  personal  being,  and  this 
is  faith.  This  at  least  is  generically  the  faith  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, and  nothing  else  is."  If  this  be  true,  and  undeniably 
it  is,  a  speculative  statement,  a  belief  in  doctrines,  is  a  thing 
really  apart  from  Christian  life,  for  in  resppct  to  the  three  great 
elements  of  our  nature,  it  deals  with  one  only,  namely,  the  intel- 
lect ;  a  dogmatic  creed  has  no  more  relation  to  the  heart  and  the 
will  in  matters  of  religion  than  the  abstractions  of  the  calculus; 
and,  besides,  it  clearly  antagonizes  the  generic  conception  of 
faith  in  the  New  Testament,  which  is  confidence  in  a  personal 
being.  After  a  discussion  of  the  relation  between  reason  and 
faith,  the  relation  between  faith  and  philosophy  is  then  taken 
up  by  Dr.  Hopkins,  and  we  have  these  significant  words  :  "  The 
above  is  the  only  view  accordant  with  the  present  tendency  to 
make  the  Person  of  Christ,  and  not  creeds,  the  center  of  the 
Christian  system  and  the  bond  of  union  among  Christians. 
That  creeds  have  ever  been  avowedly  made  the  center  is  not 
asserted  ;  but  that  before,  and  especially  since  the  reformation, 
they  have  assumed  undue  prominence,  and  have  practically 
been  made  central,  cannot  be  denied.  But  according  to  the  view 
now  taken,  faith  in  Christ  is  not  the  belief  of  truths  about  him, 
but  the  acceptance  of  Him  as  a  Savior,  and  a  commitment  of 
ourselves  to  Him,  in  all  that  he  offers  Himself  to  us  for,  and  in 
all  that  he  requires  of  us.  This  changes  our  whole  conception 
of  the  religion."  I  wish  you  to  mark  this  last  sentence.  Time 
was  when  Alexander  Campbell  stood  almost  alone  in  the  advo- 
cacy of  the  ideas  of  this  paragraph.    The  church  had  drifted 


344 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


away  from  lier  primitive  moorings,  making  practically  a  creed, 
and  not  Jesus,  her  center,  and  this  had  changed  wholly  the  scrip- 
tural ideas  of  the  church.  Then  came  this  man,  consecrating 
the  power  of  his  imperial  and  almost  matchless  intellect  to  the 
restoration  of  the  church  to  her  divine  foundation,  chosen  of 
God,  and  precious,  though  disallowed  of  human  builders,  and  a 
stone  of  stumbling  to  the  creed  builders  of  every  age.  This 
changes  our  whole  conception  of  the  religion.  "What  religion  ? " 
Such  as  we  see  in  the  degeneracy  of  denominational  forms. 
How  and  by  what  is  the  whole  conception  changed  ?  By  the 
displacement  of  creeds,  by  the  re-assertion  of  the  personal  idea, 
by  the  re-coronation  of  the  living  Christ,  who  is  the  power  of 
God  and  the  wisdom  of  God.  In  this,  the  personal  conception, 
Christianity  differs  from  all  merely  philosophical  schemes. 
Again  we  quotr :  "  Take  Plato  away  and  Platonism  remains. 
Take  Christ  away  and  you  have  no  Christianity.  It  is  implied 
in  what  has  just  been  said,  but  requires  separate  mention,  that 
assent  to  a  creed  is  not  properly  a  confession  of  faith.  It  may 
or  may  not  be  an  assent  to  what  is  included  in  '  the  faith  once 
delivered  to  the  saints,'  but  it  is  not  a  confession  of  the  faith 
which  makes  a  man  a  Christian,  or  which  is  an  evidence  that  he 
is  one.  The  ambiguity  here  is  unfortunate,  as  it  has  doubtless 
contributed  not  a  little  to  displace  the  person  of  Christ  from  its 
proper  central  position  as  the  bond  of  union  among  Christians. 
This  is  the  bond,  and  the  only  bond,  and  union  through  creeds, 
except  as  a  creed  is  involved  in  believing  on  Him,  that  is,  the 
acceptance  of  Him  as  a  Savior,  and  the  commitment  of  ourselves 
to  Him  in  love  and  obedience,  is  out  of  the  question."  Now  go 
back  with  me  to  our  beginning,  and  you  hear  this :  that  the  dis- 
tracted and  divided  condition  of  Christendom  is  anti-Christian, 
anti-scriptural,  anti-natural,  breaking  up  the  one  Body,  and 
contravening  the  Savior's  prayer  that  "  all  may  be  one ;  "  that 
there  ought  to  be  a  restoration ;  that  to  do  this  on  the  basis  of 
creeds,  "is  out  of  the  question,"  and  that  the  person  of  Christ 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


345 


"is  the  bond  and  the  only  bond  of  union."  So  living  current 
thought  speaks  to-day. 

All  this  we  see  and  know,  and  are  content,  even  should  our 
part  in  these  mighty  and  healthful  revolutions  in  religious 
thought  fail  of  recognition.  Keep  in  mind  that,  in  view  of  the 
conversion  of  the  world,  our  Fathers  taught  that  Christians 
ought  of  right  to  be  one ;  that  creeds  were  discarded  as  pos- 
sible bases  of  union ;  and  that  Christ  was  held  by  them  to  be 
the  divine  and  the  only  possible  basis  of  union,  and  we  are  pre- 
pared to  hear  more  of  the  voice  of  the  present  as  Mark  Hopkins 
utters  it.  He  says:  "It  is  in  this  direction  that  our  hope  of 
union  lies;  except  as  they  are  in  this  direction  the  present 
movements  with  that  end  in  view  will  have  little  value  and  will 
have  no  permanence."  In  the  triumph  of  these  facts  so  clearly 
asserted,  will  come  the  realization  of  the  desire  of  the  Savior's 
great  and  loving  heart,  that  all  disciples  may  be  one  in  Him 
and  the  Father,  as  they  are  one. 

This  whole  argument  leads  up  to  the  Pauline  statement  as 
its  final  resting  place,  "Other  foundation  can  no  man  lay 

THAN  THAT  WHICH  IS  LAID,  WHICH  IS  JeSUS  THE  ChRIST." 

The  foundation  of  the  church  can  alone  be  the  basis  of  unity. 
The  basis  of  unity  can  be  no  other  than  the  primitive  and 
apostolic  creed.  In  order  that  any  creed  may  be  the  basis  of 
a  restored  unity,  there  are  certain  things  which  must  be  true 
of  it.  In  the  absence  of  any  one  of  the  following  character- 
istics, it  cannot  be  such  a  creed-basis  : 

1.  It  must  have  the  warrant  of  divine  authority. — Christ 
himself  recognizes  his  own  historical  personality  as  the  foun- 
dation of  the  church.  "On  this  rock  I  will  build  my  church  ;  " 
on  himself,  as  characterized  by  the  terms  of  the  confession 
of  Peter.  "  Christ  is  the  Rock."  1  Cor.  10 :  4.  Peter  quotes 
Isaiah,  "Behold,  I  lay  in  Sion  a  chief  corner-stone,  elect, 
precious,"  and  applies  it  to  Christ. 

All  of  this  is  amply  confirmed  by  the  passage  already  cited, 
viz  :  1  Cor.  3:  11,  "For  other  foundation  can  no  man  lay  than 


346 


TEE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHUBCH. 


that  which  is  laid,  which  is  Jesus  the  Chkist."  Upon  this 
single  foundation  is  stamped  the  seal  of  divine  warrant.  Paul 
explicitly  denies  it  of  all  others.  Other  foundation  can  no 
man  lay." 

2.  It  must  be  sufficiently  comprehensive  to  embrace  all 
necessary  saving  truths 

I  can  only  group  the  essential  truths  involved  in  the  Evange- 
listic Confession : 

"  Thou  art  the  Christy    Mark  8 :  29. 

"  Thou  art  the  Christ  of  Godr    Luke  9  :  20. 

"  Thou  art  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  living  God."  Matt. 
16  :  16. 

These  statements  contain  the  central  mystery  of  all  godli- 
ness, the  center  and  the  heart  of  the  Christian  system. 

In  any  just  analysis  of  the  Evangelistic  Confession  these 
things  are  found : 

1.  A  full  recognition  of  the  Messianic  mission  as  foretold 
and  developed  in  the  Jewish  Scriptures  ; 

2.  A  full  recognition  of  the  divine  nature  of  Jesus,  of  his 
true  manhood,  and  superlative  and  transcendent  personal  rank 
and  divinity  ; 

3.  A  full  recognition  of  his  offices,  as  the  Anointed  One,  in 
their  Prophetical,  Priestly  and  Kingly  phases  ; 

4.  A  full  recognition  of  his  absolute  authority  to  forgive 
and  save  unto  "  the  uttermost." 

These  terms  all  imply  on  the  part  of  humanity,  ignorance, 
guilt  and  rebellion.  There  is  no  single  aspect  of  necessary 
truth  thinkable,  which  does  not  lie  within  the  implications  and 
express  terms  of  the  Petrine  confession:  the  historical  Christ, 
the  Anointed  One,  the  Son  of  Man,  the  Son  of  God,  the  Prophet, 
Priest  and  King ;  and  what  remains  ? 

3.  It  must  possess  inhering  saving  efficacy. — Believers  in 
human  creeds  are  not  saved  by,  but  in  despite  of,  their  creeds, 
when  saved  at  all.  Even  the  professed  advocates  of  creeds  do 
not  now  pretend  to  believe  that  these  possess  saving  or  regener- 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


847 


ating  efficacy,  '*  Subscription  to  the  standards,"  says  a  great 
Presbyterian  journal,  "acceptance  of  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
is  not  required  of  a  person  in  order  to  membership.  It  is  suffi- 
cient to  have  faith  in  Christ.'^''  The  "  acceptance  of  the  Con- 
fession "  and  "  faith  in  Christ  "  are  two  vastly  different  things, 
and  are  so  little  related  to  each  other  that  one  may  exist  with- 
out the  other.  It  is  not  "  whosoever  believes  Calvinism,  or 
Arminianism,  or  Unitarianism,  or  Trinitarianism,  is  born  of 
God,"  but,  "  WJiosoexer  helieveth  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ  is  horn 
of  Godr    1  John  5  :  1. 

It  was  told  of  Toplady  that  he  was  carried  from  what  proved 
to  be  a  dying  bed,  to  reply  to  Mr.  Wesley  on  some  question  of 
Calvinian  import,  and,  withal,  of  no  saving  value  ;  and  yet,  this 
man  in  his  higher  religious  aspirations  and  his  nobler  and 
holier  communion  with  God,  sang  better  than  he  preached  ;  for 
it  is  he  who  sings  in  that  noble  hymn: 

•'  Kock  of  Ages,  cleft  for  me, 
Let  me  hide  myself  in  thee." 

How  poor  and  worthless  appear  all  human  creeds  when  the 
soul  is  brought  to  realize,  with  him, 

"  Thou  must  save,  and  thou  alone." 

This  song  will  be  sung  by  millions,  with  melting  hearts  and 
weeping  eyes,  centuries  after  the  religious  disputes  of  the  time 
have  been  forgotten,  not  because  it  is  sweet  and  rhythmic,  but 
because  it  makes  divine  response  to  the  cry  of  the  weary  and 
heavy-laden  soul,  in  presenting  Him,  who  alone  is  mighty  to 
save. 

4.  It  must  possess  catholicity. — That  is,  it  must  be  broad 
enough  and  strong  enough  to  hold  every  true  believer,  and  must 
be  of  such  character  that  all  true  believers  must  accept  it.  It 
is  freely  granted  by  great  denominational  leaders  that  their  con- 
fessions are  not  catholic.  Dr.  Shields,  as  we  have  seen,  con- 
fesses that  they,  the  creeds,  "  ej:clude  more  Christians  than  they 
mclude."  Prof.  Shedd  says  of  the  Westminster  Confession : 
"We  do  not  say  that  it  is  sufficiently  broad  and  liberal  for 


348 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH. 


every  man  and  every  denomination."  The  very  question  in 
hand,  discussed  by  Prof.  Shedd  and  others,  the  question  of 
Revision,  demonstrates  that  it  is  not  "  sufficiently  broad  and 
liberal "  even  for  Presbyterians,  whose  "  foundation "  it  is. 
Christ's  conception  of  the  catholic  basis  is  contained  in  these 
words :  "  That  they  all  may  be  one,  which  shall  believe  on 
Me,  through  their  word.'''' 

CONCLUSION. 

We  come  before  the  world  making  the  restoration  of  the 
church  to  its  primitive  unity  upon  Apostolic  grounds,  our 
avowed  mission.  No  people  ever  fostered  a  nobler  purpose, 
cherished  a  loftier  aim,  or  advocated  a  holier  plea.  Time  was, 
when  the  union  of  Christians  was  the  dominant  idea  in  all  our 
preaching.  Have  we  not  grown  careless  and  less  insistent  ? 
Should  there  not  be  a  return  to  the  old  time  insistency  in  pre- 
senting this  large  theme  ?  No  time  has  been  so  well  prepared 
for  its  reception,  for  a  frank  and  candid  hearing  of  its  claims, 
as  the  present.  It  has,  indeed,  become  the  absorbing  question 
of  our  day,  so  quick  with  vast  mental  and  spiritual  movements. 
Shall  we  become  laggards  who  once  led  the  battle's  front  ?  This 
plea,  is,  indeed,  the  "  sacred  design  "  that  gave  us  existence  as 
a  people.  We  present  the  only  true  and  possible  foundation, 
because,  it  is  the  only  one,  possessed  of  all  necessary  attributes. 
It  has  authority,  immanent  saving  efficacy,  the  comprehension 
of  all  necessary  saving  truth,  and  catholicity.  No  human 
"  standard,"  "  symbol,"  "  summary,"  or  "  creed,"  possesses  any 
one  of  these  predicables.  Has  Arminianism,  or  Calvinism,  for 
example,  authority,  or  saving  power,  or  comprehension  of  all 
necessary  truth,  or  catholicity  ?  To  ask  the  question  is  to 
answer  it. 

We  need,  and  we  preach,  Christ — the  whole  Christ — him  of 
the  Horns  of  Hattin,  speaking  divine  lessons  for  humanity, 
"  beautiful  as  the  light,  sublime  as  heaven,  as  true  as  God." 


THE  UNITY  OF  THE  CHURCH 


349 


We  preach  him — the  tender-hearted  Miracle-worker,  weeping 
with  the  sisters  of  Bethany,  compassionating  the  Syrophenician 
woman,  speaking  tender  and  forgiving  words  to  the  shrinking 
Magdalene.  We  preach  him,  the  supreme  example  of  justice, 
love  and  self-denial.  We  preach  him  also,  and  above  all,  as 
crucified,  as  risen  from  the  dead,  as  sitting  at  the  right  hand  of 
God,  as  Lord  and  Christ,  as  Prophet,  Priest  and  King  and,  for 
the  reason  that  these  things  are  true,  as  able  and  willing 
to  make  good  the  sweet  and  holy  evangel,  "Come  unto  me  and  I 
will  give  you  rest." 

The  union  of  all  God's  people  upon  the  Bible  alone,  will  be 
the  gracious  dawning  of  the  predicted  millennial  glory.  The 
race,  ennobled  by  its  lessons,  exalted  by  its  transcendent 
morality  and  cheered  by  its  precious  promises,  will  enter  upon 
a  nobler  and  holier  career,  and  looking  away  to  him,  "the 
progeny  of  the  golden  years,"  "  the  star  out  of  Jacob,"  shall  be 
guided  far  above 

"  All  crooked  paths 
Of  time,  or  change,  or  distance,  taking  its  course 
Along  the  line  o£  limitless  desire," 

into  "  the  light  of  golden  suns  "  forever. 


ORGANIZATION. 


B.  B.  TYLER. 

"  How  far  are  we  limited  by  divine  legislation  and  precedent, 
and  liow  much  is  left  to  the  wisdom  of  men  guided  by  the  spirit 
of  the  gospel  ? " 

An  exceedingly  difficult  question.  May  the  spirit  of  love, 
and  prudence,  and  wisdom,  guide  the  writer  in  his  present  essay. 
Open  thou  mine  eyes  that  thy  servant  may  see  thy  truth,  O  God, 
and  be  able  by  Thy  grace  to  present  the  same  with  clearness 
and  courage. 

To  the  law  and  to  the  testimony  as  contained  in  the  New 
Testament.  What  are  the  facts  concerning  the  organization  of 
Christ's  holy  church  in  the  beginning  as  the  work  was  directed 
by  men  inspired  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  guided  by  this  holy 
Guest  into  all  truth  ? 

G.  I.  Lechler,  Professor  of  Theology  at  Leipsic,  in  Lange  on 
Acts,  edited  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Philip  Schaff,  says  :  "  The  fact  that 
the  day  of  Pentecost  is  the  birthday  of  the  church  has  always 
been  recognized." 

Let  the  present  investigation  begin  on  common  ground.  The 
Church  of  Christ  began  on  the  first  Pentecost  after  the  corona- 
tion of  Messiah,  and  in  the  ancient  and  holy  city  of  Jerusalem. 
But  this  historic  day  was  only  the  birthday  of  the  church.  At 
the  close  of  this  day  the  church  of  Christ  existed  on  the  earth, 
but  it  existed  as  an  infant,  and  not  as  a  full  grown,  well  organ- 
ized, and  thoroughly  equipped  body  of  believers. 

Look  at  the  facts.  The  day  of  Pentecost  has  fully  come. 
The  disciples  of  Jesus,  since  he  was  taken  from  their  sight  into 
heaven,  have  spent  the  time  in  "  an  upper  room "  "  with  one 
accord  in  prayer  and  supplication."    This  was  in  obedience  to 

(350) 


i;.  iJ.  1  vi.Ki; 


Benjamin'  B.  Tyler. — This  widely-known  brother  is  the  son  of  Elder  John 
W.  Tjier  and  Sarah  A.  Tyler,  whose  niaitlen  name  was  Koney,  both  natives 
ot  Kentucky.  He  was  born  on  a  i'arin  near  Decatur,  111.,  April  9tli,  1840, 
and  spent  his  youth  amid  tlie  rural  scenes  so  congenial  to  healthful  boyhood. 
He  was  baptized  by  his  fatlier,  Avho  was  a  pioneer  preacher,  in  Sangamon 
River,  two  miles  east  of  Decatur,  in  August,  lbb9.  Two  years  later,  on  the 
4th  of  September,  1861,  he  was  ordained  to  the  ministry,  and  innnodiately 
began  evangelistic  work.  On  December  25th,  18()2,  he  was  married  to  Miss 
Sarah  A.  Burton,  of  Eureka,  111.,  daughter  of  a  prosperous  merchant  of  thai; 
place.  "  She  is  probably  the  only  woman  in  the  world,"  he  writes,  "  v/lio 
could  have  lived  with  me."  At  any  rate,  she  has  made  him  a  most  faithful 
help-meet.  He  continued  his  labors  as  evangelist  until  December,  18(.)4, 
when  he  located  with  the  Church  in  Charleston,  111.,  as  its  pastor.  He  re- 
mained there  until  December,  18G9,  when  he  removed  to  Terre  Haute,  Ind., 
and  served  the  Church  in  that  city  until  January,  1872,  when  lie  was  called 
to  Frankfort,  Ky.,  the  capital  of  the  State.  Here  he  remained  a  little  over 
four  years,  wlien  he  became  pastor  of  the  First  Christian  Church  in  Louisville, 
Kentucky,  May  1,  187(5.  While  laboring  in  Louisville,  he  was  sent  to  Lon- 
don, to  the  "WorUrs  Sunday-school  Congress,  in  1880,  by  the  Kentucky 
Sunday-school  Union.  He  also  represented  the  Kentucky  Sunday-school 
Union  in  the  International  Sunday-school  Convention  in  Toronto,  Canada,  in 
1881,  and  was  made  a  member  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  Interna- 
tional Sunday-school  Convention  by  the  Toronto  Convention. 

He  spent  July,  August  and  September,  188.'),  at  his  own  expense,  in  Bos- 
ton, preaching  on  the  Lord's  day,  and  looking  up  the  Disciples,  and  doing  an 
important  preparatory  work.  In  October,  1883,  Bro.  Tyler  began  his  Avork 
as  pastor  of  the  Church  in  Xew  York  city,  where  he  remains  until  the  present. 
He  has  not  only  wrought  a  good  work  for  the  Church  for  which  he  labors, 
but  has  done  much  to  introduce  the  Disciples  and  their  plea  to  the  thinking 
men  of  the  east. 

He  began  to  write  regularly  for  the  Christian  Standard  in  1884,  and  his 
Xew  York  Letter  is  now  an  established  feature  of  that  pa])er.  He  was 
elected  a  member  of  the  International  Sunday-School  Committee  by  the 
International  Convention  held  in  Pittsburg  in  June,  1890,  succeeding 
Isaac  Errett,  deceased.  At  present  he  is  engaged  In  writing  a  Histonj  of  the 
Di.'icijiles  for  the  Standard  Ptddishing  Company^  now  appearing  in  weekly  in- 
stallments in  the  Christian  Standard.  The  Anierican  Society  of  Church  History, 
of  which  Philip  Schaff,  D.  D.,  is  the  President,  has  engaged  him  to  do  the 
same  Avork  in  a  series  of  Denominational  Histories,  to  be  issued  under  the 
auspices  of  Tlie  Ahicncan  Society  of  Church  History. 

Though  still  a  young  man  comparatively,  and  in  vigorous  health,  his  hair 
and  whiskers  are  as  Avhite  as  those  of  an  octogenarian.  Bro.  and  Sister  Ty- 
ler have  only  been  blessed  Avith  one  child — a  lovely  daughter, — Avho  is  noAV 
married  to  a  successful  business  man  of  Xew  York.  We  trust  their  days  may 
be  silent  in  the  metropolis  of  the  Xcav  World. 


ORGANIZATION. 


351 


the  Christ  who,  as  he  left  the  earth,  commanded  his  chosen  ones, 
saying :  "  Tarry  ye  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  until  ye  be  endued 
with  power  from  on  high."  "And  when  the  day  of  Pentecost 
Avas  fully  come,  they  were  all  with  one  accord  in  one  place. 
And  suddenly  there  came  a  sound  from  heaven  as  of  a  rushing 
mighty  wind,  and  it  filled  all  the  house  where  they  were  sitting. 
And  there  appeared  unto  them  cloven  tongues  like  as  of  fire, 
and  it  sat  upon  each  of  them.  And  they  were  all  filled  with 
the  Holy  Spirit,  and  began  to  speak  with  other  tongues  as  the 
Spirit  gave  them  utterance."  The  "  sound  from  heaven  as  of  a 
mighty  rushing  wind  "  called  the  people  together  in  the  place 
where  the  elect  apostles  and  their  friends  were  waiting  on  the 
Lord.  "They  were  all  amazed  and  marvelled,  saying  one  to 
another.  Behold,  are  not  all  these  which  speak  Galileans  ?  And 
how  hear  we  every  man  in  our  own  tongue,  wherein  we  were 
born  ? "  "  They  were  all  amazed,  and  were  in  doubt,  saying  one 
to  another,  "What  meaneth  this  ?  Others  mocking  said,  These 
men  are  full  of  new  wine." 

This  state  of  mind  on  the  part  of  the  multitude,  and  these 
remarks  opened  the  way  for  Simon  Peter  to  explain  from  the 
prophecy  of  Joel  the  phenomenon,  and  to  present  the  claims  of 
Jesus,  "a  man  approved  of  God  among  you  by  miracles  and 
wonders  and  signs,  which  God  did  by  him."  He  told  the  assem- 
bled multitude  that  Jesus  "  was  delivered  by  the  determinate 
counsel  and  foreknowledge  of  God,"  and  he  charged  that  the 
men  at  that  moment  in  his  presence  had  "  taken,  and  by  wicked 
hands  "  had  "  crucified  and  slain  "  this  Jesus,  "  whom  God  had 
raised  up."  A  prophecy  from  David  was  adduced,  explained 
and  applied.  He  points  out  the  esteem  in  which  David  was  held 
by  saying,  "his  sepulcher  is  with  us  unto  this  day."  "There- 
fore," says  Simon  Peter,  "being  a  prophet,  and  knowing  that 
God  had  sworn  with  an  oath  to  him,  that  of  the  fruit  of  his 
loins,  according  to  the  flesh,  he  would  raise  up  Christ  to  sit  on 
his  throne,  he  seeing  this  before  spake  of  the  resurrection  of 
Christ,  that  his  soul  was  not  left  in  hell,  neither  did  his  flesh 


352 


OBGANIZATION, 


see  corruption."  "  This  Jesus  hath  God  raised  up,  whereof  we 
all,"  Peter  and  the  eleven,  "  are  witnesses.  Therefore  being  by 
the  right  hand  of  God  exalted,  and  having  received  of  the  Father 
the  promise  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  he  hath  shed  forth  this,  which  ye 
now  see  and  hear."  The  climax  of  this  first  full  Gospel  sermon 
was  reached  when  the  heaven-inspired  preacher  exclaimed : 
"  Therefore,  let  all  the  house  of  Israel  know  assuredly,  that  God 
hath  made  that  same  Jesus,  whom  ye  have  crucified,  both  Lord 
and  Christ." 

The  effect  was  electrical.  The  sacred  historian  says  that 
when  the  people,  who  had  come  together  out  of  curiosity,  and 
were  inclined  in  the  beginning,  at  least  some  of  them,  to  mock 
and  deride,  heard  this,  "  they  were  pricked  in  their  heart,  and 
said  unto  Peter  and  the  rest  of  the  apostles.  Men !  Brethren ! 
what  shall  we  do  ?  " 

"  Then  Peter  said  unto  them.  Repent,  and  be  baptized  every 
one  of  you  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins, 
and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Hol}^  Spirit.  For  the  prom- 
ise is  unto  you,  and  to  your  children,  and  to  all  that  are  afar 
off,  even  as  many  as  the  Lord  our  God  shall  call." 

These  are  the  facts  as  to  the  calling  of  the  people  together 
in  Jerusalem  on  Pentecost,  the  first  Pentecost  after  the  corona- 
tion of  the  Messiah,  as  to  the  character  of  the  audience,  and  the 
beginning,  progress,  substance,  and  consummation  of  the  ser- 
mon. 

Now  as  to  the  immediate  visible  result.  "  Then  they  that 
gladly  received  his  Word  were  baptized :  and  the  same  da}* 
there  were  added  unto  them," — the  original  one  hundred  and 
twenty — "about  three  thousand  souls."  "And  they  continued 
steadfastly  in  the  apostles'  doctrine  and  fellowship,  and  in 
breaking  of  bread,  and  in  prayers."  "And  all  that  believed " 
— in  Jesus  as  both  Lord  and  Christ  according  to  the  teaching  of 
the  sermon — "  and  all  that  believed  were  together  and  had  all 
things  common;  and  sold  their  possessions  and  goods,  and 
parted  them  to  all  men,  as  every  man  had  need."    "And  they 


ORGANIZATION. 


353 


continuing  daily  with  one  accord  in  the  temple,  and  breaking 
bread  from  house  to  house,  did  eat  their  meat  with  gladness  and 
singleness  of  heart,  praising  God,  and  having  favor  with  all  the 
people." 

Thus  closed  the  birthday  of  the  Christian  Church.  There  is 
not  a  word,  not  a  syllable,  not  an  intimation  on  the  subject  of 
organization.  Elders  were  not  chosen.  Deacons  were  not 
selected.  Pastors  were  not  called.  A  board  of  trustees  was  not 
organized.  A  building  committee  was  not  appointed.  No  man 
was  called  to  the  chair  as  president.  Records  of  the  proceed- 
ings were  not  kept  by  an  ajDpointed  secretary.  There  was 
nothing  in  the  city  of  Jerusalem,  on  this  ever  memorable  Pente- 
cost, looking  toward  organization,  as  we  understand  and  use  the 
word.  What  have  we,  then,  constituting  the  new-born  church 
of  Christ  ?  SimjDly  this :  About  three  thousand  persons  have 
listened  to  the  story  of  Jesus  as  told  by  his  personal  friends, 
and  to  the  evidence  tending  to  show  that  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
who  had  lived  among  them  as  "  a  man  approved  of  God  by  mir- 
acles, and  wonders,  and  signs,"  and  whom  they  had  crucified, 
had  been  raised  from  the  dead,  and  exalted  to  a  place  in  the 
heavens  by  the  right  hand  of  God,  and  was  therefore  both  Lord 
and  Christ.  Hearing  this  story,  and  considering  this  evidence, 
they  have  been  led  to  believe  in  Jesus  as  their  Lord  and  Christ. 
As  a  result  of  this  belief,  and  the  penitence  necessarily  ensuing, 
they  have  been  baptized  in  obedience  to  the  Lord's  command  in 
token  of  submission  to  him.  In  everything  else  they  aie  ortho- 
dox Jews.  This  mass  of  human  beings  can  only  be  called  a 
church,  the  Church  of  Christ  in  Jerusalem,  in  the  sense  that  by 
j  their  faith  and  penitence  and  baptism  they  have  received  Jesus 
of  Nazareth  as  the  Messiah,  whose  coming  was  foretold  in  their 
sacred  books.  Thus  and  to  this  extent  are  they  separated  from 
their  fleshly  kindred. 

Was  the  church  in  Jerusalem  a  Christian  church  in  the  com- 
mon acceptation  of  the  term  ? 

In  some  important  particulars  the  believers  in  Jerusalem  for 
23 


354 


OBGANIZATION, 


a  long  period  of  time  did  not  constitute  a  Christian  Church  in 
the  sense  in  which  the  term  is  now  generally  employed. 

There  was  no  organization  of  those  who,  under  the  preaching 
of  inspired  men,  gladly  received  the  Word,  and  the  same  day 
were  baptized.  From  the  second  chapter  of  Acts  of  Apostles 
neither  Congregationalists,  Presbyterians  nor  Episcopalians  can 
find  encouragement  as  such.  There  was  among  the  disciples  of 
Christ  in  Jerusalem  no  standing  or  other  committee.  The 
"  session,"  as  our  Presbyterian  friends  say,  was  not.  There  was 
no  bishop — certainly  no  diocesan.  The  Plymouth  Brethren  can 
find  more  encouragement  on  the  subject  of  organization  from  a 
reading  of  this  portion  of  the  inspired  writings  than  any  other 
people. 

Limit  a  study  of  the  subject  to  this  part  of  the  Xew  Testa- 
ment, and  the  position  of  the  Plymouth  Brethren  is  sustained 
by  the  word  of  God ;  continue  the  investigation  to  the  Omega  of 
Revelation,  and  they  are  certainly  shown  to  be  in  error.  Organ- 
ization came  to  the  Church  of  Christ  little  by  little,  a  step  at  a 
time.  The  organization  of  believers  under  the  personal  super- 
vision of  inspired  men  was  an  evolution. 

Imagine  a  body  of  believers  to-day  in  this  condition,  as  to 
organization,  and  possessing  the  thoughts  and  prejudices  which 
filled  the  minds  of  the  Jerusalem  disciples. 

Not  even  were  their  eyes  open  to  see  the  supreme  mission  of 
Christ's  Church.  They  were  ignorant  of  the  meaning  of 
"Preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature;"  "Teach  all  nations." 
"  Every  creature  "  meant,  as  they  interpreted  the  Commission, 
every  son  and  daughter  of  Abraham.  "All  nations  "  meant  no 
more  to  them  than  that  disciples  were  to  be  made  of  Jews 
wherever  they  could  be  found  on  the  face  of  the  earth.  Gentiles 
were  not  the  subjects  of  redeeming  grace.  These  Christians 
were  worse  than  aTi^i-missionary.  It  was  years  after  the  experi- 
ences of  the  great  Pentecost,  when  his  brethren  in  Jerusalem 
took  Peter  to  task  for  eating  with  Cornelius.  It  is  certain  that 
for  years  no  Gentile  disciple  of  Christ  would  have  been  per- 


ORGANIZATION. 


355 


mitted  to  participate  in  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper,  in 
the  city  of  Jerusalem,  with  the  Jews  who  believed  in  Christ.  Up 
to  the  time  of  the  baptism  of  Cornelius,  the  disciples  did  not 
understand  that  they  were,  in  the  aggregate,  anything  more 
than  a  Jewish  sect  like  "  the  sect  of  the  Pharisees  "  and  "  the 
sect  of  the  Sadducees."  This  was  also  the  popular,  outside 
estimate  of  them.  They  were  spoken  of  by  their  enemies  as 
"the  sect  of  the  Nazarenes."  The  apostle  Paul  speaks  of  his 
Christian  brethren  as  constituting  "  the  sect  everywhere  spoken 
against."  Little  by  little,  their  and  our  Lord's  command  to 
"preach  the  gospel  to  every  creature,"  came  to  be,  in  some 
degree,  understood.  After  the  passage  of  years  they  saw,  to  an 
extent,  the  capacity  and  the  catholicity  of  the  gospel,  and  the 
genuinely  philanthropic  character  of  the  new  order  instituted  by 
Jesus  of  Nazareth.  There  were  strifes  and  contentions  among 
those  also  who  were  exhorted  to  prove  to  all  men  their  disciple- 
ship  by  loving  one  another  even  as  Jesus  had  loved  them. 
When  Paul  went  to  Jerusalem,  after  one  of  his  missionary 
tours,  with  alms  and  offerings  collected  from  Gentiles  for 
Hebrew  Christians,  James  described  the  feeling  of  the  disciples 
of  Jesus  when  he  said :  "  Thou  seest,  brother,  how  many  thou- 
sands of  Jews  there  are  which  believe,  and  they  are  all  zealous 
of  the  law.''''  Every  reader  is  familiar  with  the  ^^;i-Christian 
conduct  of  the  Hebrew  Christians  in  Jerusalem^  at  this  time, 
toward  "  the  chiefest  of  the  apostles." 

This  much,  merely  in  the  way  of  hints,  as  to  the  true  answer 
to  the  question :  "Was  the  body  of  believers  in  Jerusalem  a 
Christian  Church,  in  the  common  acceptation  of  the  term  ?  " 

Following  closely  the  history  contained  in  Acts  of  Apostles, 
we  come  to  the  beginning  of  organization. 

The  power  of  the  preached  gospel  was  apparent.  Multitudes 
of  Jews  turned  to  Jesus,  as  the  Messiah,  under  the  preaching  of 
the  men  who,  on  the  ever  memorable  Pentecost,  had  been  bap- 
tized with  the  Holy  Spirit.  When  the  number  of  disciples  of 
Christ  had  greatly  multiplied,  there  arose  a  murmuring  of  the 


356 


ORGANIZATION. 


Grecian  Jews  against  the  Hebrews,  because  their  widows  were 
neglected  in  the  daily  ministration.  What  does  this  mean? 
The  Grecian  Jews  were  probably  descendants  of  Abraham,  who 
lived  in  Greece.  Money,  or  clothing,  or  both  were  distributed 
by  the  Jerusalem  Christians  to  their  needy  spiritual  kindred  in 
the  city.  The  majority  of  those  who  believed  in  Jesus  were 
pure  Hebrews.  The  Hebrew  language,  as  it  was  at  this  time 
spoken,  was  their  language.  The  Holy  Land  was  their  birth- 
place and  permanent  home.  The  Grecian  Jews  were  in  a  minor- 
ity. It  is  probable  not  only  that  the  Hebrews  constituted  the 
majority  of  those  who  believed  in  Jesus,  but  also  that  they 
possessed  the  greater  part  of  the  wealth  at  that  time  in  the 
hands  of  the  disciples  of  Christ.  The  poor  and  the  minority 
could  easily  see  that  their  helpless  ones  were  neglected  in  the 
daily  distribution  of  money,  food,  raiment.  This  is  human 
nature  as  it  manifests  itself  in  Christ's  Church,  and  out  of  it, 
to-day.  It  is  also  possible  that  there  was,  in  fact,  some  neglect. 
This  would  seem  to  have  been  unavoidable.  As  already  seen 
there  was  no  organization  of  the  believers  in  the  city  in  which 
the  Christian  Church  came  to  its  birth.  Everything  was  in  the 
hands  of  the  elect  ambassadors  of  the  Christ.  They  were 
evangelists,  apostles,  prophets,  pastors,  teachers,  bishops,  pres- 
byters, deacons.  The  number  of  believers  had  enormously 
increased.  At  the  close  of  Pentecost  day  there  were  in  Jerusa- 
lem at  least  three  thousand  one  hundred  and  twenty  believers. 
The  historian  also  tells  us  at  the  close  of  the  second  chapter  of 
Acts  that  "  the  Lord  added  to  them  day  by  day  those  that  were 
being  saved."  He  tells  us  in  the  beginning  of  his  fourth  chap- 
ter, that  "  the  number  of  men  became  about  five  thousand." 
Dr.  Abbott  saj^s  that  the  original  implies  male  converts.  With- 
out counting  the  women,  there  were  at  this  time  five  thousand 
men  in  Jerusalem  who  believed.  It  is  uncertain  whether  this 
number  represents  the  male  converts  on  this  occasion,  or  the 
entire  number  of  heads  of  families  who  had  turned  to  the  Lord. 
Probably  the  latter.    In  the  sixth  chapter  of  Acts  we  read  that 


ORGANIZATION. 


357 


"the  number  of  the  disciples  was  multiplied."  In  the  same 
section  of  the  New  Testament  we  read  that  "  the  number  of  the 
disciples  multiplied  in  Jerusalem  greatly  ;  "  and,  that  "  a  great 
company  of  the  priests  became  obedient  to  tiie  faith."  What 
this  fact  implies  cannot  at  this  time  be  considered.  It  is  certain 
that,  in  Jerusalem,  several  thousand  men,  besides  women  and 
children,  believed  in  Jesus  as  the  Messiah.  If  some  were 
neglected  "  in  the  daily  ministration,"  when  the  spiritual  and 
temporal  interests  of  these  thousands  were  in  the  hands  of  only 
twelve  men,  it  ought  not  to  be  accounted  a  strange  thing. 

When  the  murmuring  of  the  Grecian  Jews  against  the 
Hebrews  came  to  the  ears  of  the  apostles,  they  at  once  said  that 
it  was  not  reasonable  to  require  them  to  turn  from  the  ministry 
of  the  Word  to  serve  tables.  They,  therefore,  suggested  to  their 
dissatisfied  brethren  that  it  would  be  well  to  select  seven  men 
of  honest  report,  full  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  wisdom,  whom,  said 
they,  "  we  will  appoint  over  this  business."  This  is  the  first 
suggestion  of  the  organization  of  believers  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment. The  suggestion  was  full  of  common  sense,  and  mani- 
fested unmistakably  the  true  Christian  spirit,  the  Spirit  of 
Christ,  and,  while  it  was  made  primarily  to  the  murmuring 
brethren,  it  pleased,  when  it  became  known,  the  whole  multi- 
tude of  the  disciples.  The  names  of  the  seven  men  of  honest 
report,  full  also  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  wisdom,  selected  to  serve 
tables,  that  is,  in  this  instance,  to  see  that  the  widows  of  the 
Grecian  Jews  were  not  neglected  in  the  daily  ministration — the 
names  of  these  men  show  that  they  belonged  to  the  complain- 
ing party,  though  they  themselves  may  not  have  complained. 
The  names  are  Greek.  "  They  chose  Stephen,  a  man  full  of 
faith  and  the  Holy  Spirit,  and  Philip,  and  Prochorus,  Nicanor, 
and  Timon,  and  Parmenas,  and  Nicolas,  a  proselyte  of  Antioch, 
whom  they  set  before  the  apostles ;  and  when  they  had  prayed, 
they  laid  their  hands  on  them." 

The  appointment  of  this  temporary  committee  for  the  pur- 


358 


ORGANIZATION. 


pose  specified,  was  the  bef^inning  of  the  organization  of  the 
disciples  of  Christ. 

Was  this  the  beginning  of  what  is  now  called  "  the  diaco- 
nate  ? "  Probably  it  was,  but  the  seven  are  not  called  deacons 
by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Some  of  the  members  of  this  committee 
developed  soon  into  preachers  of  great  power.  Stephen  did 
great  wonders  and  miracles  among  the  people.  In  a  short  time, 
apparently,  after  he  is  introduced  to  us  as  a  man  of  honest 
reputation,  full  also  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  wisdom,  he  deliv- 
ered an  address  that  cost  him  his  life.  Nor  did  the  speech 
alone,  recorded  in  the  seventh  chapter  of  Acts,  bring  him  to  a 
violent  death.  Before  this  he  had  presented  such  a  catholic 
view  of  the  gospel,  and  presented  it  with  such  power,  that  he 
was  charged  before  the  Sanhedrim  with  afiirming  "  that  this 
Jesus  of  Nazareth  shall  destroy  this  place  and  shall  change  the 
customs  which  Moses  delivered  us."  Stephen  was  a  grand, 
broad  man,  and  a  mighty  proclaimer  of  the  truth.  The  modern 
deacon  in  the  modern  Christian  Church  is  not  a  descendant  of 
this  first  martyr. 

Philip  is  the  name  of  another  of  the  "  seven  men  of  honest 
report,  full  also  of  faith,  of  the  Holy  Spirit  and  wisdom," 
selected  by  the  Grecian  Jews  and  appointed  by  the  apostles  to 
superintend  "  the  daily  ministration."  For  a  time  Philip  served 
tables  ;  but  he  soon  comes  into  view  as  a  zealous  and  successful 
preacher  of  Christ,  and  is  called  "  Philip  the  evangelist." 

The  next  hint  at  organization,  after  that  contained  in  the 
sixth  chapter  of  Acts  of  Apostles,  is  found  in  the  last  verse  of 
the  eleventh  chapter. 

When  the  disciples  in  Antioch  heard,  by  the  mouth  of 
Agabus,  of  a  great  dearth  that  would  prevail  throughout  all  the 
world,  and  in  which  their  spiritual  kindred  in  Judea  would  be 
especial  sufferers,  they  determined,  every  man,  to  send  such 
relief  as  they  were  able  to  give.  And  this  they  did,  we  are  told, 
sending  their  contributions  to  the  elders  in  the  famine-stricken 
region  by  the  hands  of  Barnabas  and  Saul. 


OROANIZATION. 


359 


This  is  the  first  mention  in  the  New  Testament  of  elders  in 
the  church  of  Christ.  It  is  evident  that  at  this  time  there  was 
no  such  sharp  division  of  labor  and  responsibility  among  the 
officers  in  the  household  of  the  faith  as  at  the  present  time. 
The  present  theory  is  that  the  elders  have  charge  of  the  spirit- 
ual interests  of  the  Christian  brotherhood,  while  those  whom  we 
call  deacons  give  attention  to  the  temporal  concerns  of  the 
church.  If  this  had  been  the  understanding  of  the  disciples  of 
Christ  when  the  famine  prevailed  in  the  days  of  Claudius  Csesar, 
the  contribution  would  have  been  sent  to  those  whose  sole  or 
peculiar  function  it  was  to  receive  and  disburse  the  offerings  of 
their  charitably  disposed  and  financially  fortunate  brethren. 
Deacons  exist  in  the  church  to-day,  in  theory  at  least,  to  receive 
and  disburse  money — to  have  a  care  for  the  poor — to  serve 
tables — to  see  that  the  widows,  the  poor,  the  needy,  the  help- 
less are  not  neglected  in  the  weekly  ministrations — that  is,  in 
the  distribution  of  money,  food,  medicine  and  raiment.  Why 
was  not  the  offering  for  "  the  brethren  which  dwelt  in  Judea  "  at 
the  time  of  "  the  great  dearth,"  "  which  came  to  pass  in  the 
da3^s  of  Claudius  Caesar,"  sent  to  the  deacons?  Why  was  it 
sent  to  the  elders  ?  Because  not  yet  had  our  distinction  between 
the  eldership  and  the  diaconate  grown  up. 

At  first,  the  apostles,  as  we  have  seen,  had  charge  of  every- 
thing pertaining  to  the  life  of  the  new-born  church.  By  and  by, 
when  there  was  temporary  dissatisfaction  with  their  adminis- 
tration of  the  temporalities  of  the  church  in  Jerusalem,  a  com- 
mittee of  seven  discreet  men  was  appointed  to  have  charge  of 
this  business.  This  was  only  for  a  time.  As  the  number  of 
disciples  increased,  it  became  impossible  for  the  apostles  to  care 
for  the  spiritual  health  of  all  the  babes  in  Christ.  They  gath- 
ered about  and  associated  with  themselves,  therefore,  men 
qualified  to  assist  in  this  superlatively  important  department  of 
Christian  effort.  At  first  these  men  were  associated  with  the 
apostles  as  ministerial  assistants.  By  these  holy  men,  inspired 
by  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  were  instructed  and  trained  for  the 


360 


ORGANIZATION. 


work  of  the  ministry.  As  the  Christian  community  grew,  these 
helpers  became,  in  an  important  sense,  independent  workers. 
What  the  apostles  did,  in  the  beginning,  in  the  way  of  general 
superintendence,  they  now  in  their  respective  places  did.  Like 
the  men  of  whom  they  had  learned,  they  had  charge  alike  of 
the  temporal  and  spiritual  concerns  of  the  brotherhood.  Hence 
the  contribution  of  the  disciples  in  Antioch  for  "  the  brethren 
which  dwelt  in  Judea,"  was  "  sent "  "  to  the  elders." 

Thus  "  the  eldership "  came  into  being  in  the  church  of 
Christ,  and  this  was  its  character  and  function.  Persons  occu- 
pying the  position  here  indicated,  and  doing  the  work  here 
spoken  of,  are  called  in  the  New  Testament,  "  elders,"  "  pas- 
tors," "  teachers,"  "  bishops."  These  are  not  four  words  descrip- 
tive of  four  different  officers,  but  four  names  for  one  officer. 

These  various  names  present  different  sides  of  this  official 
character,  and  suggest  different  phases  of  the  work  performed 
by  this  spiritual  functionary  in  the  church  of  Christ.  In  this 
church  at  Antioch,  the  church  whose  members  sent  relief  to  their 
"  brethren  which  dwelt  in  Judea,"  there  were  "  certain  prophets 
and  teachers."  A  prophet  is  any  one  who  speaks  for  God ;  he 
is,  according  to  Paul,  one  who  "  speaketh  unto  men  to  edifica- 
tion, and  exhortation,  and  comfort."  "He  that  prophesieth 
edifietli  the  church." 

An  examination  of  the  brief  history  of  the  church  in  Ephe- 
sus,  as  contained  in  Acts  of  Apostles,  will  aid  in  understanding 
the  origin  and  function  of  the  New  Testament  eldership,  pas- 
torate, bishopric. 

When  Paul  entered  Ephesus  he  found  twelve  disciples. 
Their  understanding  of  the  things  pertaining  to  the  Christ  and 
his  reign  was  exceedingly  imperfect.  They  had  not,  for  instance, 
heard  of  the  descent  of  the  Holy  Spirit.  They  had  not  been 
baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jesus.  Under  the  teaching  of 
Paul  they  were  led  to  faith  in  the  Son  of  God  and  were  baptized 
as  an  expression  of  this  faith  in  harmony  with  the  manifest 
requirement  of  the  Great  Teacher.    This  was  the  beginning  of 


ORGANIZATION. 


3G1 


a  great  work  in  Ephesus,  "For  three  years,"  "  with  all  humility 
of  mind,  and  with  many  tears  and  temptations,"  "  publicly  and 
from  house  to  house,"  Paul  "taught"  the  people,  "testifying  to 
the  Jews  and  also  to  the  Greeks,  repentance  toward  God,  and 
faith  toward  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ."  The  result  was  a  great 
congregation  of  Christians  in  the  capital  of  Asia.  The  magni- 
tude of  the  work,  and  of  the  number  turned  to  the  Lord,  may  be 
inferred  from  the  speech  of  "  Demetrius,  a  silversmith,  which 
made  silver  shrines  for  Diana,"  "  when  he  called  together " 
"  workmen  of  like  occupation."  He  said  in  his  inflammatory 
address  that  Paul  had  persuaded  and  turned  away  much  people. 
"  Our  craft,"  said  he,  "  is  in  danger  to  be  set  at  naught."  "  The 
temple  of  the  great  goddess  Diana  "  "  whom  all  Asia  and  the 
world"  worshiped,  was  falling  into  contempt  in  the  minds  of  the 
people,  as  a  result  of  Paul's  faithful  gospel  ministry.  "  The 
whole  city  was  filled  with  confusion"  after  the  speech  of 
Demetrius. 

The  excitement  was  so  intense,  that  when  one  Alexander,  a 
friend  of  Paul,  attempted  to  ofier  "his  defense  unto  the  people  ' 
they  "  all  with  one  voice  about  the  space  of  two  hours  cried  out. 
Great  is  Diana  of  the  Ephesians."  By  the  skillful  intervention 
of  the  town  clerk,  the  lives  of  Alexander  and  Paul  were  saved. 
These  facts  indicate  to  some  degree  the  extent  of  Paul's  influ- 
ence in  Ephesus  as  a  result  of  his  three  years'  ministry. 

There  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  there  were  several 
thousand  disciples  of  Christ  in  Ephesus — Christian  men  and 
women,  who  had  turned  to  the  Lord  Jesus  from  among  Jews  and 
Gentiles  alike.  The  magnitude  of  the  work,  the  number  of  con- 
verts made,  the  wide  extent  of  the  preacher's  influence  in  that 
great  city  in  turning  men  to  the  Lord,  will  explain  why  there 
were  "  elders  of  the  church."  After  Paul  left  Ephesus,  on  his 
way  to  Jerusalem,  he  paused  at  Miletus,  where,  by  appointment, 
he  met  and  addressed  "  the  elders  of  the  church."  The  great 
number  of  believers  in  Ephesus  made  a  plurality  of  "pastors," 
"bishops,"  "teachers,"  "elders,"  a  necessity.    Only  by  a  plu- 


3G2 


ORGANIZATION. 


rality  of  "bishops"  could  this  enormous  church  be  properly 
cared  for. 

An  examination  of  Paul's  address  at  Miletus  to  "  the  elders 
of  the  church,"  discloses  the  fact  that  their  work  was  to  be  such 
work  as  they  had  seen  him  carry  on  in  their  midst  and  perform 
in  their  behalf.  Hence  his  reference  to  himself  and  his  course 
of  life.  He  seems  to  present  his  own  conduct  as  an  example  in 
the  pastoral  office,  and  to  say  to  them,  "As  you  have  seen  and 
heard  me  during  the  three  years  that  I  have  been  with  you,  so 
do  you  conduct  yourselves  as  overseers  of  the  flock,  and  speak 
as  you  have  heard  me  speak  the  truth  of  God."  "  I  have 
showed  you  all  things,  how  that  so  laboring  ye  ought  to  support 
the  weak,  and  to  remember  the  words  of  the  Lord  Jesus,  how  he 
said,  'It  is  more  blessed  to  give  than  to  receive.'  "  In  other 
words,  "  Take  up  my  work  and  carry  it  forward.  Be  to  this 
people,  as  nearly  as  possible,  what  I  have  been  to  them." 

Why  was  there  a  plurality  of  elders  in  the  Church  of  Christ 
in  Ephesus  ?  The  great  num  ber  of  disciples  made  a  plurality  a 
necessity.  No  one  man  could  care  for  the  thousands  who,  in 
that  city,  had  turned  to  the  Lord.  If  now,  in  any  community, 
the  number  of  disciples  makes  a  plurality  of  pastors  a  necessity, 
or  if  the  work  to  be  done  in  a  given  place  requires  more  than 
one  "elder,"  "bishop,"  or  "  pastor,"  then  let  more  than  one  such 
functionary  be  called  to  and  engaged  in  the  work.  If  one  man 
can  do  the  work  in  a  given  community  or  church,  then,  in  such 
community  or  church,  let  there  be  one,  and  only  one,  "  elder," 
"pastor,"  "bishop."  This  seems  to  be  the  teaching  alike  of 
Scripture  and  common  sense.  Seven  men  were  summoned  to  act 
on  the  committee  in  Jerusalem,  because  that  number  of  men 
was  needed  and  could  do  the  work.  It  is  safe  to  say  that  if,  in 
that  great  congregation,  two  or  three  men  could  have  served 
tables  satisfactorily,  then  only  this  number  would  have  been 
appointed ;  but  if  twice  or  ten  times  seven  had  been  needed,  that 
this  number  would  have  been  called  to  the  work. 

It  is  iinj)ortant  also  to  call  especial  attention  to  the  work 


ORGANIZATION. 


3G3 


which  was  to  be  done  by  the  elders  in  Ephesus.  Already  the 
suggestion  has  been  made  that  these  persons  were  expected  to 
take  up  and  carry  forward  the  work  so  successfully  inaugurated 
by  Paul,  and  as  nearly  as  j)ossible  in  the  manner  in  which  they 
had  seen  him  conduct  it.  They  were  to  be  ministers  of  the  gos- 
pel. There  is  no  difference  between  the  New  Testament  elder- 
ship in  the  Church  of  Christ  and  the  preachers  of  the  Word. 
Preachers  were  elders ;  elders  were  preachers.  No  man  was  an 
"elder,"  a  "pastor,"  a  "bishop,"  who  was  not  a  teacher  of 
Christianity — a  preacher  of  the  Word.  The  distinction  made 
by  our  Presbyterian  brethren,  and  some  others,  between  teach- 
ing and  ruling  elders  is,  as  I  read  the  New  Testament,  without 
adequate  warrant.  There  was  no  such  distinction  in  the  apos- 
tolic church;  there  should  be  no  such  distinction  now.  The 
qualifications  of  "elders,"  "bishops,"  "pastors,"  are  given  at 
length  and  in  detail  in  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  Titus. 
Hence  these  are  called  the  "  Pastoral  Epistles."  They  contain 
instruction  to  the  churches  as  to  the  character  of  men  suitable 
for  the  sacred  office ;  and  to  those  who  fill  "  the  office  of  a 
bishop,"  instruction  is  conveyed  as  to  their  work.  But  it  is 
clear  from  the  reading  of  the  Pastoral  Epistles,  as  well  as  from 
the  hints  contained  in  Acts  of  Apostles,  that  every  man  who 
desired  "  the  office  of  a  bishop,"  and  attained  thereunto,  desired 
"a  good  work,"  and  was  expected  to  give  himself  wholly  to  the 
work.  "  No  man  that  warreth  entangleth  himself  with  the 
affairs  of  this  life ;  that  he  may  please  him  who  hath  chosen 
him  to  be  a  soldier." 

After  this  brief,  rapid  and  imperfect  induction  of  some  of  the 
principal  facts  contained  in  the  New  Testament  on  the  subject, 
we  are  now  prepared  to  answer  definitely  the  question  pro- 
pounded in  the  beginning  of  this  series  of  papers  on  organiza- 
tion. 

"  How  far  are  we  limited  by  divine  legislation  and  precedent 
in  the  organization  of  churches  of  Christ,  and  how  much  is  left 
to  the  wisdom  of  men,  guided  by  the  Spirit  of  the  gospel  ? " 


3G4 


ORGANIZATION. 


There  is  no  divine  legislation  for  the  organization  of  the 
churches  of  Christ.  The  New  Testament  is  not  a  statute  book; 
it  is  a  book  of  principles.  The  nature  of  Christianity  and  the 
work  which  it  proposes  require  that  certain  men,  qualified  by 
nature,  culture  and  grace,  shall  give  themselves  entirely  to  the 
ministry  of  the  Word,  while  others  are  detailed  to  have  a  care 
for  the  temporal  concerns  of  each  church  of  Christ,  or  congrega- 
tion of  Christians.  Not  only  do  the  genius  of  Christianity,  and 
the  work  which  it  proposes  to  do,  alike  for  the  bodies  and  the 
souls  of  men,  require  this,  but  there  is,  as  we  have  seen,  New 
Testament  teaching  for  this.  It  is  apparent  also  from  the 
recorded  teaching  of  inspired  men  that  it  is  the  duty  of  "  him 
that  is  taught  in  the  word  to  communicate  unto  him  that  teach- 
eth  in  all  good  things ; "  but  there  is  precedent,  also,  for  the 
latter's  working  with  his  hands  during  the  secular  days  of  the 
week,  while  engaged  on  the  Holy  day  in  teaching  the  truths  and 
principles  of  the  Christian  religion.  Paul  certainly  did  this  in 
Ephesus  and  Corinth.  In  this,  as  in  a  hundred  other  things,  he 
was  an  example  to  the  ministry  in  all  ages.  If  there  is  no 
divine  legislation  to  guide  in  the  organization  of  churches  of 
Christ,  everything  is  left  to  the  wisdom  of  men  guided  by  the 
spirit  of  the  gospel.  To  discover  the  spirit  of  the  gospel  in  this 
matter,  there  is  in  the  New  Testament  writings  a  record  of  the 
conduct  of  men  guided  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Imitating  these 
men,  we  cannot  go  astray.  They  had  from  the  Master  himself 
the  promise  of  infallible  guidance,  and  of  being  led  into  the 
truth. 


Archibald  McLeax  is  the  son  of  Malcolm  and  Alexandra  ^McLean.  His 
parents  left  Scotland  in  their  youth  and  settled  in  Prince  Edward  Island. 
His  father  lives  there  still;  his  mother  went  to  her  long  home  when  he  was  a 
child.  On  this  beautiful  island  in  tiie  Gulf  of  St.  Lawrence  the  subject  of 
this  sketch  was  born,  and  receiv'ed  an  elementary  education.  He  united 
with  the  church  in  Suunnerside  under  the  iJi'eacliing  of  the  saintly  D. 
Crawford.  Having  worked  for  some  years  at  carriage  making  he  entered 
Bethany  College  in  September,  18G9,  ami  was  graduated  in  June,  l^i74.  The 
Sunday  following  Couunencement  he  began  his  ministry  in  the  cliurcli  at  Mt. 
Healthy,  Ohio,  a  suburb  of  Cincinnati.  At  that  time  Isaac  Errett  was 
editing  the  Stxiitldrd ;  W.  T.  Moore  and  A.  I.  Ilobbs  were  preaching  in  Cin- 
cinnati. In  March,  1882,  he  was  elected  Corresponding  Secretary  of  the 
P\)reign  Society.  For  three  years  the  work  demanded  a  ])art  of  his  time.  In 
1885  he  gave  up  the  work  in  Mt.  Healthy  that  he  might  devote  his  whole 
time  and  strength  to  the  work  of  the  Society.  On  the  death  of  W.  II. 
AVoolery  he  was  elected  President  of  Bethany  College.  For  two  years  he 
tilled  both  positions.  The  double  work  pro\ing  too  onerous  he  resignetl  the 
presidency  of  the  college,  June  17,  1891.  He  is  yet  a  young  man  (the  exact 
date  of  his  birth  is  not  known,  as  the  record  was  destroyed)  and  in  a  letter  to 
the  editor  says,  "  ^ly  record  is  yet  to  be  made."  Those  who  know  him 
best,  have  no  doubt  as  to  the  character  of  that  record.  As  the  leader  in  our 
foreign  mission  work,  he  holds  a  position  of  great  responsibility  and  use- 
fulness. 


A.  :M(1,ean. 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


A.  m'lEAN,  L,L.  D. 
TEE  ETEBXAL  PUItPOSE. 

The  mystery  whicli  had  been  revealed  to  the  apostles  and 
prophets  was,  that  the  nations  should  be  fellow-heirs,-  and  fel- 
low-members of  the  body,  and  fellow-partakers  of  the  promise 
in  Christ  Jesus  through  the  gospel.  Those  who  were  alienated 
from  the  commonwealth  of  Israel,  and  strangers  from  the  cove- 
nants of  promise,  should  become  fellow-citizens  with  the  saints 
and  of  the  household  of  God.  Those  who  were  far  off  should  be 
made  nigh  in  the  blood  of  Christ.  This  was  in  accordance  with 
the  eternal  purpose  of  God ;  in  this  his  manifold  wisdom  was 
seen.  This  is  the  marvel  of  the  ages,  that  Christ  should  be 
preached  among  all  nations  as  the  hope  of  glory.  The  gospel  is 
not  for  the  most  advanced  nations,  nor  for  choice  spirits  simply 
among  all  nations ;  it  is  for  all  men  everywhere.  God  is  not 
willing  that  any  should  perish,  but  that  all  should  come  to  a 
knowledge  of  the  truth.  He  has  ordained  that  the  gospel  of  his 
grace  should  be  preached  unto  every  creature  under  heaven  for 
the  obedience  of  the  faith.  This  is  the  mystery  which  had  been 
kept  in  silence  through  times  eternal,  but  now  is  manifested. 
This  truth  is  presented  with  great  clearness  and  fullness  in  the 
Old  Testament  and  in  the  New. 

Thus  to  Abraham  it  was  said :  "  In  thee  and  in  thy  seed 
shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  be  blessed."  His  own 
descendants  were  God's  chosen  people.  To  them  pertained  the 
adoption,  and  the  glory,  and  the  covenants,  and  the  giving  of 
the  law,  and  the  service  of  God,  and  tlie  promises.  They  were 
intrusted  with  the  oracles  of  God.    They  were  chosen  and 

(365) 


366 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


exalted  that  they  might  be  the  means  of  communicating  bless- 
ings to  all  the  families  of  the  earth.  David,  speaking  of  Christ, 
said:  "He  shall  have  dominion  from  sea  to  sea,  and  from  the 
river  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth.  Yea,  all  kings  shall  fall  down 
before  him :  all  nations  shall  serve  him.  His  name  shall  endure 
forever;  his  name  shall  be  continued  as  long  as  the  sun;  all 
nations  shall  be  blessed  in  him."  He  shall  bless  his  own  peo- 
ple, but  his  blessings  shall  not  be  confined  to  them  alone ;  they 
shall  extend  to  all  peoples,  Isaiah  said :  "  It  shall  come  to 
pass  in  the  last  days,  that  the  mountain  of  the  Lord's  house 
shall  be  established  in  the  top  of  the  mountains,  and  shall  be 
exalted  above  the  hills,  and  all  nations  shall  flow  unto  it."  He 
represents  many  people  as  saying,  "  Come  ye,  and  let  us  go  up 
to  the  mountain  of  the  Lord,  to  the  house  of  the  God  of  Jacob : 
and  he  will  teach  us  of  his  ways,  and  we  will  walk  in  his  paths." 
Daniel  said :  "  I  saw  in  the  night  visions,  and,  behold,  one  like 
the  Son  of  Man  came  with  the  clouds  of  heaven,  and  came  to  the 
Ancient  of  days,  and  they  brought  him  near  before  him.  And 
there  was  given  him  dominion,  and  glory,  and  a  kingdom,  that 
all  peoples,  nations  and  languages  should  serve  him ;  his  domin- 
ion is  an  everlasting  dominion,  which  shall  not  pass  away ;  and 
his  kingdom  that  which  shall  not  be  destroyed."  Habakkuk 
said:  "For  the  earth  shall  be  filled  with  the  knowledge  of  the 
glory  of  the  Lord,  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea."  Malachi  said: 
"  For  from  the  rising  of  the  sun  even  until  the  going  down  of  the 
same,  my  name  shall  be  great  among  the  Gentiles,  and  in  every 
place  incense  shall  be  offered  unto  my  name,  and  a  pure  ofier- 
ing ;  for  my  name  shall  be  great  among  the  heathen,  saith  the 
Lord  of  hosts."  To  these  holy  men,  who  spoke  as  they  were 
moved  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  Christ  was  not  to  be  the  Savior  of  one 
nation  only;  he  was  to  be  the  desire  and  salvation  of  all  nations. 
His  kingdom  should  fill  the  whole  earth  and  should  endure  for- 
ever. The  heathen  were  to  be  given  to  him  for  an  inheritance, 
and  the  uttermost  parts  of  the  earth  for  a  possession. 

When  we  pass  to  the  New  Testament  we  find  the  same  truth. 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD.  367 

The  angel  said  to  the  shepherds,  "  Fear  not ;  for,  behold,  I  bring 
jou  good  tidings  of  great  joy,  which,  shall  be  to  all  people.  For 
unto  yon  is  born  this  day  in  the  city  of  David  a  Savior,  who  is 
Christ  the  Lord."  These  good  tidings  did  not  concern  them 
only,  or  the  Jewish  people  only  ;  they  concerned  all  people. 
When  Simeon  took  the  holy  child  in  his  arms,  he  said :  "  Lord, 
now  lettest  thou  thy  servant  depart  in  peace,  according  to  thy 
word ;  for  mine  eyes  have  seen  thy  salvation  which  thou  hast 
prepared  for  all  people  ;  a  light  to  lighten  the  Gentiles,  and  the 
g^ory  of  thy  people  Israel."  He  was  to  be  the  Savior  of  both. 
John  the  Baptist  said :  "  Every  valley  shall  be  filled,  and  every 
mountain  shall  be  brought  low ;  and  the  crooked  shall  become 
straight,  and  the  rough  ways  smooth ;  and  all  flesh  shall  see 
the  salvation  of  God."  Christ  was  destined  to  sit  upon  the 
throne  of  universal  empire.  In  his  own  teaching  he  said :  "God 
so  loved  the  world  that  he  gave  his  only  begotten  Son,  that  who- 
soever believeth  on  him  should  not  perish,  but  have  eternal  life." 
Divine  love  is  not  bounded  by  the  limits  of  Judea,  or  Palestine, 
or  Asia ;  it  embraces  the  whole  world.  Speaking  of  his  death, 
he  said :  "And  I,  if  I  be  lifted  up  from  the  earth,  will  draw  all 
men  unto  me."  He  tasted  death  for  every  man.  He  gave  him- 
self for  all,  the  testimony  to  be  borne  in  its  own  time.  After  he 
rose  he  said,  "  Thus  it  is  written,  and  thus  it  behooved  Christ  to 
suffer,  and  to  rise  from  the  dead  on  the  third  day ;  and  that 
rej^entance  and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preached  in  his  name 
among  all  the  nations."  On  a  mountain  in  Galilee  he  said  to 
the  eleven,  "Go  ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the  gospel 
to  the  whole  creation."  Just  before  his  ascension  he  said,  "  But 
ye  shall  receive  power,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  come  upon  you, 
and  ye  shall  be  my  witnesses  both  in  Jerusalem  and  in  all 
Jadea,  and  Samaria,  and  unto  the  uttermost  part  of  the  earth." 
The  lost  sheep  of  the  house  of  Israel  were  to  hear  the  truth  first, 
but  there  were  other  sheep  not  of  that  fold ;  they  also  should 
hear  the  message  of  salvation,  and  there  should  be  one  flock 
and  one  shepherd.    Truth  is  the  inalienable  birthright  of  every 


3G8 


TEE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  TEE  WORLD. 


human  soul.  Christ  is  the  light  that  lighteth  every  man  that 
Cometh  into  the  world. 

The  apostles  did  as  they  were  commissioned  to  do.  They 
"began  at  Jerusalem.  They  preached  the  gospel  first  of  all  to 
their  own  countrymen.  Thus  Peter  when  speaking  to  the  Jews 
said:  "Ye  are  the  children  of  the  prophets  and  of  the  covenant 
which  God  made  with  our  fathers,  saj^ing  unto  Abraham,  And 
in  thy  seed  shall  all  the  families  of  the  earth  be  blest.  Unto 
you  first  God  having  raised  up  his  Son  Jesus  sent  him  to  bless 
you,  in  turning  away  every  one  of  you  from  his  sins."  Paul 
has  the  same  thought.  He  said  to  the  Jews  :  "  It  was  necessary 
that  the  gospel  should  be  preached  first  to  you ;  but  seeing  you 
put  it  from  you  and  judge  yourselves  unworthy  of  everlasting 
life,  lo,  we  turn  to  the  Gentiles.  For  so  hath  God  commanded 
us.  saying,  I  have  set  thee  to  be  a  light  unto  the  Gentiles,  that 
thou  shouldst  be  for  salvation  unto  the  ends  of  the  earth." 
They  began  with  the  Jews,  but  they  did  not  stop  with  them. 
Their  field  Avas  the  world.  For  all  nations  there  was  one  Lord, 
one  faith,  one  baj^tism,  one  God  and  Father  of  all,  who  is  above 
all,  and  through  all,  and  in  all.  There  was  no  distinction 
between  the  Jew  and  the  Greek  ;  for  the  same  Lord  is  Lord  of 
all,  and  is  rich  unto  all  them  who  call  upon  him.  Writing  to 
the  Galatians  Paul  said :  "  Christ  has  redeemed  us  from  the 
curse  of  the  law,  having  been  made  a  curse  for  us ;  for  it  is 
written,  Cursed  is  every  one  that  hangeth  on  a  tree  ;  that  ujDon 
the  Gentiles  might  come  the  blessing  of  Abraham  in  Christ 
Jesus  ;  that  we  might  receive  the  promise  of  the  Spirit  through 
faith."  And  again :  "  There  can  be  neither  Jew  nor  Greek, 
there  can  be  neither  bond  nor  free,  there  can  be  no  male  and 
female,  for  ye  are  all  one  man  in  Christ  Jesus.  And  if  ye  are 
Christ's,  then  are  ye  Abraham's  seed,  heirs  according  to  prom- 
ise." John  saw  an  angel  fljnng  in  mid  heaven,  having  an  eter- 
nal gospel  to  proclaim  unto  them  that  dwell  on  the  earth,  and 
unto  every  nation,  and  tribe,  and  tongue,  and  people.  He  saw 
also  a  great  multitude  which  no  man  could  number,  out  of  every 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


369 


nation,  and  of  all  tribes,  and  peoples,  and  tongues,  standing 
before  the  throne  of  God  and  the  Lamb,  arrayed  in  white  robes, 
and  palms  in  their  hands  ;  and  they  cry  with  a  great  voice,  say- 
ing, "  Salvation  unto  our  God  which  sitteth  on  the  throne  and 
unto  the  Lamb."  Christ  must  reign  until  every  enemy  is  put 
under  his  feet.  The  kingdoms  of  this  world  must  become  the 
kingdoms  of  our  Lord.  And  when  the  triumph  is  complete,  the 
redeemed  shall  chant  the  thunder-psalm  of  victory,  "  Worthy  is 
the  Lamb  that  hath  been  slain  to  receive  the  pOwer,  and  riches, 
and  wisdom,  and  might,  and  honor,  and  glory,  and  blessing." 

Other  passages  might  be  quoted,  but  these  are  sufficient  to 
show  that  the  gospel  of  the  glory  of  the  blessed  God  must  be 
preached  to  every  creature  under  heaven.  We  may  hinder  or 
we  may  hasten  the  accomplishment  of  this  grand  design  ;  we 
cannot  defeat  it.  With  us  or  without  us  the  world  will  be 
evangelized.  The  work  will  be  done  in  any  case.  If  we  fail  to 
do  our  part,  the  kingdom  will  be  taken  from  us  and  given  to 
those  who  bear  the  fruits  thereof.  May  God  help  us  to  do  our 
whole  duty,  that  when  the  nations  of  the  saved  shall  come  up 
from  the  continents  and  the  islands  of  the  sea,  we  may  have  a 
right  to  the  tree  of  life  and  may  participate  in  the  jubilee  of 
a  ransomed  world. 

WHAT  HAS  BEEN  ACCOMPLISHED. 

It  has  been  said  that  the  Christian  religion  is  by  its  very 
nature  missionary,  progressive,  world-embracing ;  it  would  cease 
to  exist  if  it  ceased  to  be  missionary,  if  it  disregarded  the  part- 
.ing  injunction  of  its  founder:  "Go  ye  therefore,  and  make 
'  disciples  of  all  the  nations,  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  the 
Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  teaching  them  to 
observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  commanded  j^ou."  Christ  gave 
himself  a  ransom  for  all,  the  testimony  to  be  borne  in  its  own 
times.  The  promise  is,  "  Whosoever  shall  call  on  the  name  of 
the  Lord  shall  be  saved."    "But  how  shall  they  call  on  him  in 

24 


370 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


whom  they  have  not  believed  ?  And  how  shall  they  believe  in 
him  of  whom  they  have  not  heard?  And  how  shall  they  hear 
without  a  preacher  ?  And  how  shall  they  preach  excepting  they 
be  sent?"  The  gospel  is  not  for  a  select  and  favored  few;  it  is 
for  all  men  everywhere.  Those  who  have  received  it  are  under 
obligation  to  send  it  into  the  regions  beyond.  Christianity  is 
therefore  essentially  a  missionary  religion.  The  history  of  the 
church  shows  that  in  carrying  out  the  great  commission  there 
have  been  three  epochs,  namely :  the  Apostolic,  the  Medieval 
and  the  Modern.    Let  us  take  them  in  their  order : 

I.  The  Apostolic  Age.  Just  before  his  ascension,  our  Lord 
said  to  his  disciples  :  "  But  ye  shall  receive  power,  when  the 
Holy  Spirit  is  come  upon  you ;  and  ye  shall  be  my  witnesses 
both  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  all  Judea  and  Samaria,  and  unto  the 
uttermost  part  of  the  earth."  When  the  Holy  Spirit  was  given, 
there  appeared  tongues,  parting  asunder,  like  as  of  fire,  and  it 
sat  on  each  one  of  them.  This  was  a  symbol  of  their  office.  At 
first  the  gospel  was  preached  to  none,  but  to  Jews  only.  Even 
the  apostles  did  not  understand  that  the  Gentiles  were  to  be 
fellow-partakers  in  the  promise  of  Christ  Jesus  through  the 
gospel.  When  Peter  was  told  to  go  and  preach  to  the  house- 
hold of  Cornelius,  he  did  not  think  that  he  ought  to  go.  He 
thought  that  it  was  unlawful  for  a  Jew  to  join  himself  or  come 
unto  one  of  another  nation.  In  the  vision  which  he  saw,  God 
showed  him  that  he  should  not  call  any  man  common  or 
unclean.  It  was  not  until  the  conversion  of  Cornelius,  ten  years 
after  Pentecost,  that  it  was  known  that  the  door  of  faith  was 
open  unto  the  Gentiles.  From  that  time  the  apostles  made  no 
distinction  on  account  of  race.  Their  aim  henceforth  was  the 
evangelization  of  the  world.  Every  Christian  was  a  missionary; 
every  proselyte  was  a  propagandist ;  every  church  was  a  train- 
ing-school and  a  missionary  center,  radiating  gospel  light  far 
and  near. 

The  book  of  Acts  records  some  of  the  triumphs  won.  On 
Pentecost  three  thousand  were  added.    Soon  after,  the  number 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


371 


of  men  was  five  thousand.  A  little  later,  we  read  that  believers 
were  the  more  added  to  the  Lord,  multitudes  both  of  men  and 
women.  Again,  we  are  told  that  the  disciples  in  Jerusalem  mul- 
tiplied greatly,  and  that  a  great  company  of  priests  became 
obedient  unto  the  faith.  In  Joppa  many  believed  in  the  Lord. 
All  that  dwelt  at  Lydda  and  Sharon  turned  to  the  Lord.  In 
Antioch  a  great  number  of  them  that  believed  turned  to  the 
Lord.  In  Iconium  a  great  multitude  both  of  Jews  and  Greeks 
believed.  In  Derbe  many  disciples  were  made.  In  Thessa- 
lonica  some  of  the  Jews  were  persuaded  and  of  the  devout 
Greeks  a  great  multitude,  and  of  the  chief  women  not  a  few- 
In  Corinth  many  hearing,  believed,  and  were  baptized.  In 
Berea  many  of  the  Jews  believed :  also  of  the  Greek  women  of 
honorable  estate,  and  men,  not  a  few.  In  Ephesus  the  word  of 
the  Lord  grew  mightily  and  prevailed.  It  was  here  that  Deme- 
trius said  to  the  silversmiths :  "  You  see  and  hear,  that  not 
alone  at  Ephesus,  but  almost  through  all  Asia,  this  Paul  hath 
persuaded  and  turned  away  much  people."  Converts  are  men- 
tioned in  Tyre,  Ca3sarea,  Troas,  Athens,  Philij)pi,  Lystra,  and 
Damascus.  Paul  speaks  of  the  gospel  as  bearing  fruit  in  all 
the  world.  Peter  writes  to  Christians  in  Pontus,  Galatia,  Cap- 
padocia,  Asia,  and  Bithynia.  The  brethren  in  Jerusalem  said 
to  Paul :  "  You  see  how  many  myriads  there  are  among  the 
Jews  of  them  who  have  believed !  " 

Friends  and  foes  agree  respecting  the  early  success  of  the 
gospel.  Thus  Tacitus  says :  "  This  detestable  superstition 
broke  out  on  all  sides,  not  only  in  Judea,  but  in  the  city  of 
Rome  itself.  At  first,  only  they  were  apprehended  who  con- 
fessed themselves  of  that  sect ;  afterwards  a  vast  multitude  was 
discovered  by  them."  Pliny,  in  his  letter  to  Trajan,  says: 
"Suspending  all  judicial  proceedings,  I  have  recourse  to  you 
for  advice  ;  for  it  has  appeared  to  me  a  matter  highly  deserving 
consideration,  especially  on  account  of  the  great  number  of  per- 
sons who  are  in  danger  of  suflering ;  for  many  of  all  ages,  and 
of  every  rank,  of  both  sexes  alike,  are  accused  and  will  be 


372 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


accused.  Nor  has  the  contagion  of  this  superstition  seized 
cities  only,  but  the  lesser  towns  also,  and  the  open  country." 
According  to  Pliny,  the  temples  were  forsaken  and  the  sacred 
solemnities  were  ignored  and  the  victims  for  the  altars  found 
few  purchasers.  Tertiillian  says  :  "  We  are  but  of  yesterday, 
and,  lo,  we  fill  the  whole  empire  ;  your  cities,  your  islands,  your 
fortresses,  your  municipalities,  your  councils,  nay,  even  the 
camp,  the  sections,  the  palace,  the  senate,  the  forum."  And 
again :  "  In  whom  have  tlie  nations  believed,  but  in  the  Christ 
who  is  already  come  ?  In  him  believe  the  Partliians,  the  Medes, 
the  Elamites,  the  dwellers  in  Mesopotamia,  in  Armenia,  Phrygia, 
Cappadocia,  in  Pontus  and  Asia,  in  Pamphylia,  in  Egypt,  and 
in  the  parts  of  Libya  beyond  Gyrene,  inhabited  by  Romans, 
Jews,  and  Proselytes ;  this  is  the  faith  of  several  tribes  of 
Getulians  ;  the  Moors,  the  Spaniards,  and  the  various  nations  of 
Gaul,  the  parts  of  Britain,  inaccessible  to  the  Romans,  but  sub- 
ject to  Christ,  hold  the  same  faith,  as  du  also  the  Samaritans, 
the  Dacians,  the  Germans,  the  Scythians,  and  many  other 
nations  in  provinces  and  islands  unknown  to  us."  Justin  Mar- 
tyr says:  ''There  is  not  a  single  race  of  men,  barbarians, 
Greek,  or  by  whatever  name  they  may  be  called,  warlike  or 
nomadic,  homeless  or  dwelling  in  tents,  or  leading  a  pastoral 
life,  among  whom  prayers  and  thanksgiving  are  not  offered  in 
the  name  of  Jesus  the  crucified,  to  the  Father  and  Creator  of 
all  things."  Gibbon  says:  "While  the  Roman  Empire  was 
invaded  by  open  violence,  or  undermined  by  slow  decay,  a  pure 
and  humble  religion  gently  insinuated  itself  into  the  minds  of 
men,  grew  up  in  silence  and  obscurity,  derived  new  vigor  from 
opposition,  and  finally  erected  the  triumphant  banner  of  the 
cross  on  the  ruins  of  the  capitol."  Pressense  describes  the 
steady,  forward  march  of  the  church,  which  no  obstacle  could 
impede,  and  no  danger  daunt.  The  followers  of  Christ  go  far 
and  wide  over  the  vast  field  open  to  Christian  labor.  The  gospel 
spreads  over  the  whole  of  Asia  Minor ;  it  reaches  the  borders 
of  India,  penetrates  the  deserts  of  Africa,  and  touches  the  heart 


TEE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


373 


of  Egyptian  Africa.  The  great  apostle  and  his  companion  carry 
it  into  Greece — to  the  very  center  of  ancient  civilization.  Every- 
where flourishing  churches  flame  out  like  beacons  through  the 
darkness  of  pagan  night.  In  this  age  the  gospel  was  preached 
as  far  as  the  limits  of  the  Roman  Empire,  and  in  some  instances 
far  beyond  these  limits.  The  work  of  the  church  was  facilitated 
by  the  great  roads  v/hich  had  been  constructed  for  military  and 
commercial  purposes,  by  the  difl'usion  of  the  Greek  language, 
and  by  the  dispersion  of  the  Jews. 

II.  What  was  done  in  tlie  Middle  Ages.  Vv'hen  the  Empire 
fell,  a  wave  of  barbarism  swept  over  Europe.  The  church  was 
one  of  the  few  institutions  that  survived.  Christian  people 
went  to  work  to  convert  these  barbarians.  By  far  the  greatest 
missionary  activity  was  seen  in  the  North.  Christianity  entered 
Britain  with  the  Romans,  but  its  success  was  very  limited. 
When  the  Romans  withdrew,  the  Saxons  came,  and  Christianity 
perished  before  them.  For  a  century  and  a  half  Britain  was 
pagan  territory.  The  work  began  in  this  part  of  the  world  with 
St.  Patrick,  the  apostle  of  Ireland.  This  illustrious  man  was 
born  in  Scotland  in  395.  While  yet  a  lad  he  was  carried  ofl'by 
pirates  and  sold  as  a  slave  in  Ireland.  He  escaped  to  the  conti- 
nent, and  being  converted,  went  back  to  Ireland  to  preach  the 
gospel.  He  met  the  king  and  his  Druids  at  Tara,  and  made  so 
favorable  an  impression  that  he  was  allowed  to  continue  his 
work.  He  won  the  hearts  of  peasants  and  nobles ;  he  instructed 
whole  tribes  in  the  gospel ;  he  trained  the  best  of  them  to  be 
missionaries  in  turn.  He  established  schools  in  which  mission- 
aries were  trained  for  their  work  for  several  centuries  after  his 
death.  Before  he  died  he  won  Ireland  for  Christ.  The  work 
began  in  Scotland  with  Columba.  This  man  was  educated  in 
one  of  the  schools  of  St.  Patrick.  In  his  forty-second  year  he 
and  twelve  associates  started  to  Scotland.  He  landed  at  lona. 
Here  he  founded  that  famous  establishment  whose  ruins  still 
cause  hearts  to  glow  with  admiration  and  gratitude.  He  founded 
schools  and  churches  from  the  Orkneys  and  Hebrides  as  far 


374 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


south  as  the  Humber.  His  pupils  became  known  as  the  Scots- 
men of  the  next  four  hundred  years,  all  over  Europe.  The  work 
began  in  England  with  Augustine.  Gregory  the  Great  saw 
some  Yorkshire  boys  exposed  for  sale  in  Rome.  Learning  that 
they  were  Angles  he  said  :  "  Not  Angles  but  angels,  if  they  had 
the  gospel."  He  wanted  to  go  himself  to  England  and  started, 
but  was  recalled.  When  he  became  Pope  he  sent  Augustine 
with  forty  monks  to  win  England  to  the  faith.  Ethelbert,  King 
of  Kent,  had  married  a  Christian  princess.  No  doubt  this  had 
much  to  do  with  the  conversion  of  the  king.  Under  the  labors 
of  Augustine  the  first  English  city  of  Canterbury  sprang  up. 
The  Kingdom  of  Kent  expanded  into  the  Christian  Empire  of 
Great  Britain.  This  in  turn  led  to  the  conversion  of  Germany, 
of  North  America,  of  Australasia,  and  of  the  islands  of  the 
Pacific. 

British  Christianity  did  not  fail  to  possess  a  proselyting 
spirit.  The  disciples  of  Columba  went  everywhere,  planting 
where  they  went  the  banner  of  the  cross.  They  swarmed  like 
bees  into  the  dark  places  of  heathen  Europe,  carrying  with  them 
the  light  of  the  gospel  of  the  glory  of  Christ.  Thus  Colura- 
banus  went  to  France  and  settled  among  a  barbarous  people. 
He  preached  from  Burgundy  to  Lombardy  and  the  Roman 
Apennines.  His  life  was  often  in  peril  because  of  his  denun- 
ciation of  sin  and  his  opposition  to  idols ;  but  he  went  on  with 
his  work  until  he  was  called  to  his  reward.  So  Boniface,  an 
Englishman  by  birth,  went  to  Germany  and  labored  among  the 
Thuringians,  Hessians  and  Saxons.  He  won  thousands  to  Christ 
by  his  self-denial,  his  courage,  and  his  toils.  Wherever  he 
labored  heathen  temples  disappeared,  churches  were  built, 
schools  were  opened,  the  land  was  brought  under  the  plow,  and 
the  sound  of  prayer  and  praise  was  heard.  The  roll  of  mission- 
ary heroes  contains  few  names  more  glorious  than  that  of  Boni- 
face, the  ai^ostle  of  Germany.  So  when  the  terrible  Vikings  of 
Scandinavia  were  the  scourge  of  every  land  and  the  terror  of 
every  sea,  there  were  men  brave  enough  to  penetrate  the  regions 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


375 


whence  they  came  and  plant  among  them  the  germs  of  Chris- 
tian civilization.  In  the  ninth  century  the  children  of  the  North 
burst  forth  from  their  creeks  and  icebound  lakes,  and  prowled 
along  the  defenseless  shores  of  Grermany,  France  and  England. 
Anskar  was  ready  to  go  to  the  homes  of  these  men  and  preach 
Christ  to  them.  He  went  to  Denmark,  to  Jutland,  to  Sweden 
and  to  Norway.  Did  space  permit,  it  would  be  easy  to  tell  of 
the  noble  men  who  took  part  in  this  work,  and  to  whom  the 
world  owes  so  much  for  its  present  Christian  civilization.  Of 
these  were  Ulphilas,  who  won  the  Goths  to  Christ;  Valentinus, 
the  apostle  of  Noricum  ;  Kilian,  of  Franconia ;  Fridolin,  who 
Christianized  the  Alemanni ;  Willibrord,  who  carried  the  truth 
to  Friesland,  Westphalia,  and  Batavia;  Gallus,  the  apostle  of 
Switzerland;  Gregory,  of  Utrecht ;  Sturmi,  of  Fulda ;  Cyril  and 
Methodius,  who  preached  the  word  in  Bohemia,  Bulgaria, 
and  Moravia ;  Vicelin,  who  toiled  amid  many  discouragements 
among  the  savage  Wends  ;  Meinhard,  who  evangelized  Livonia  ; 
Adelbert,  who  suffered  death  in  Prussia  ;  Otho,  Avho  penetrated 
into  the  farthest  recesses  of  Pomerania ;  and  Raimond  Lull,  who 
did  so  much  for  the  conversion  of  the  Saracens.  By  the  close  of 
the  fourteenth  century  missionary  activity  ceased.  Europe  was 
nominally  Christian.  Xavier  went  to  India,  Japan  and  China. 
The  writings  of  Marco  Palo  caused  Columbus  to  seek  a  more 
direct  route  to  India.  He  was  anxious  to  win  India  and  Cathay 
for  Christ.  But  Xavier  and  Columbus  were  exceptions.  The 
work  of  that  period  was  done. 

III.  The  Modern  Period.  Luther  and  his  associates  did 
not  concern  themselves  about  missions.  They  thought  that  the 
end  of  all  things  was  at  hand.  For  two  centuries  after  the 
Reformation  scarcely  anything  was  done  for  the  conversion  of 
the  heathen  world.  The  present  era  began  less  than  a  century 
ago.  The  Moravians  and  the  Society  for  the  Propagation  of  the 
Gospel  began  their  operations  long  before  that  time,  but  their 
work  was  on  a  small  scale  and  did  not  attract  much  attention. 
The  Modern  Period  began  with  the  departure  of  William  Carey 


376 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


for  India  in  1793.  The  fullness  of  times  was  come.  Cook's 
voyages  gave  new  life  to  the  interest  felt  by  Christendom  in  for- 
eign lands  and  peoples.  The  French  Revolution  and  the 
American  war  of  Independence  gave  currency  to  new  ideas  of 
political  freedom  and  to  the  worth  of  man  as  man.  The 
Colonial  expansion  of  England,  and  the  use  of  steam  in  naviga- 
tion, brought  the  heathen  world  to  our  doors. 

William  Carey  is  regarded  as  the  father  of  modern  missions. 
This  man  was  a  cobbler  by  trade.  As  he  worked  at  his  bench 
he  thought  of  the  countless  millions  in  heathen  darkness,  and 
he  resolved  with  God's  help  to  do  something  to  better  their  con- 
dition. He  used  every  spare  moment  to  increase  his  stock  of 
knowledge,  and  after  a  while  was  called  to  preach.  At  a  minis- 
terial association  he  proposed,  as  a  suitable  topic  for  discussion 
at  the  next  meeting,  this :  "  The  duty  of  the  church  to  attempt 
to  send  the  gospel  to  the  heathen."  The  president  heard  the 
proposal  with  surprise  and  anger,  and  said  :  "  Young  man,  sit 
down ;  when  it  will  please  the  Lord  to  convert  the  heathen,  he 
will  do  it  without  your  aid  or  mine."  His  brethren  regarded 
him  as  a  well-meaning  but  weak-minded  brother.  He  sat  down, 
but  he  was  not  daunted  by  the  rebuke.  He  continued  to  plead 
in  public  and  in  private  on  behalf  of  this  cause,  and  soon  others 
began  to  see  it  very  much  as  he  did.  The  next  year  he  was 
invited  to  preach  the  opening  sermon  to  the  association.  He 
spoke  from  the  words  of  Isaiah :  "  Enlarge  the  place  of  thy 
tent,  and  let  them  stretch  forth  the  curtains  of  thine  habitation ; 
spare  not,  lengthen  thy  cords,  and  strengthen  thy  stakes ;  for 
thou  shalt  break  forth  on  the  right  hand  and  on  the  left,  and 
thy  seed  shall  inherit  the  Gentiles,  and  make  the  desolate  cities 
to  be  inhabited."  He  dwelt  on  two  leading  thoughts,  namely, 
"Expect  great  things  from  God,"  and  "Attempt  great  things  for 
God."  Soon  after  a  missionary  society  was  formed  and  he  was 
sent  to  India.  His  life  and  work  mark  an  epoch  in  the  history 
of  the  church. 

Ten  years  after  Carey  was  commanded  to  be  silent,  some 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


377 


member  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Church  of  Scotland 
brought  up  the  same  question.  The  leading  men  in  tfeat  body 
declared  that  the  idea  was  laughable  and  fanciful ;  some  said  it 
was  dangerous  and  revolutionary;  it  was  thought  to  be  highly 
improper  and  absurd  to  tliink  of  sending  the  gospel  abroad 
while  there  remained  a  single  person  at  home  unsaved.  They 
went  on  in  this  strain  until  the  aged  Dr.  Erskine  arose  and 
quoted  the  commands  and  promises  of  the  Lord  on  this  subject, 
and  thus  recalled  the  Assembly  to  a  recognition  and  to  a  per- 
formance of  a  long-neglected  duty.  A  society  was  organized  iu 
Scotland,  and  some  of  the  choicest  young  men  of  the  nation  were 
sent  out  to  heathen  lands  to  preach  the  unsearchable  riches  of 
Christ. 

The  leader  in  this  movement  in  this  country  was  Samuel  J. 
Mills.  While  he  was  yet  a  child  he  heard  his  mother  say,  "  I 
have  consecrated  this  boy  to  God  as  a  missionary."  When  he 
gave  himself  in  love  and  trust  to  the  Lord  he  resolved  that  his 
mother's  prayer  should  be  answered.  In  1806  he  entered  Wil- 
liams College.  The  next  year  he  invited  several  students  to 
take  a  walk  with  him.  He  led  them  out  into  a  meadow  behind 
a  haystack,  and  there  they  spent  the  entire  day  in  prayer  and 
fasting,  and  conversation  about  missions.  They  formed  them- 
selves into  a  band,  the  object  of  which  was  declared  to  be  the 
establishment  of  one  or  more  missions  among  the  heathen. 
After  graduation  they  went  to  Andover,  where  they  were  joined 
by  such  men  as  Adoniram  Judson  and  Samuel  Newell.  The 
American  Board  was  organized  to  send  out  those  young  men  to 
preach  the  gospel  where  Christ  had  not  been  named. 

Many  of  the  first  missionaries  were  tradesmen  and  mechan- 
ics. Thus  Carey  was  a  cobbler,  Ward  was  a  printer,  Johnson 
was  a  baker,  Morrison  was  a  last-maker,  Molfat  was  a  gardener, 
and  John  Williams  and  Samuel  Marsden  were  blacksmiths. 
The  cause  of  missions  was  so  poorly  esteemed  that  it  was  said 
that  no  man  of  moderation  and  good  sense  could  be  found  who 
would  give  his  life  to  work  in  the  mission  field.  Now  all  that  is 


378  THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 

changed.  It  is  no  uncommon  thing  for  men  of  ability,  and  char- 
acter, and  culture,  to  offer  to  go  wherever  their  services  maj^  be 
needed.  The  roll  of  modern  missionaries  contains  the  names 
of  Martjn,  Heber,  Judson,  Duff,  Wilson,  Selwyn,  Patteson, 
Schwartz,  Livingstone,  Gutzlaff,  Burns,  Williams,  Hannington, 
Mackaye,  and  a  host  of  others.  These  men  were  worthy  to 
stand  before  kings.  Recently  over  six  thousand  college  students 
signed  a  pledge  expressing  their  willingness  and  desire  to  go 
out  as  missionaries  when  the  Lord  opens  the  way.  The  convic- 
tion is  spreading  that  the  best  men  are  needed  for  this  work. 
"  God  had  only  one  Son,  and  he  made  a  missionary  of  him,  and 
sent  him  into  the  world  to  seek  and  to  save  the  lost." 

The  whole  world  is  now  open  to  the  Gospel.  A  century  ago 
this  was  not  the  case.  At  that  time  the  largest  fields  were 
closed  against  the  truth.  It  was  for  this  reason  that  the  first 
missionaries  went  to  such  places  as  Greenland,  Labrador,  Mada- 
gascar, the  West  Indies,  and  the  Islands  of  the  Pacific.  British 
statesmen  felt  that  the  jjreaching  of  the  gospel  in  India  would 
imperil  the  integrit}^  of  the  Empire.  Those  who  sought  permis- 
sion to  labor  in  India  were  refused  it.  Fifty  years  ago  Ray 
Palmer  said :  "  I  fancy  I  am  coming  back  to  the  earth  after  five 
hundred  years,  and  then  I  will  find  Japan  open  to  the  gospel." 
The  Jesuits  had  been  expelled.  The  converts  had  been  called 
upon  to  renounce  their  faith  in  Christ.  Thirty  thousand  refused 
and  were  beheaded.  Their  bodies  were  buried  in  a  common 
grave,  and  over  that  grave  these  words  were  written :  "  While 
the  sun  warms  the  earth,  let  no  Christian  be  so  bold  as  to  enter 
Japan."  China  was  hermetically  sealed  against  Christian  peo- 
ple. She  dreaded  Christianity  far  more  than  she  dreaded 
cholera,  and  took  far  greater  pains  to  protect  herself  against  its 
contagion.  Africa  was  the  Dark  Continent.  Some  lights  had 
been  kindled  along  the  coast  that  by  God's  grace  shall  never  be 
put  out,  but  the  interior  was  as  dark  as  the  shadow  of  death. 
Now  these  lands  are  open  everywhere.  Missionaries  are  in  all 
the  provinces  of  India,  from  Cape  Comarin  to  the  Himalayas. 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


379 


The  British  government  has  built  fifteen  thousand  miles  of  rail- 
road in  India  in  the  last  forty  years.  Schools  and  colleges  and 
universities  have  been  established.  The  missionaries  are  free 
to  go  where  they  please,  and  wherever  they  go  they  are  pro- 
tected in  person  and  property  by  the  British  flag.  Ray  Palmer 
has  been  dead  only  three  years,  and  for  thirty  years  Japan  has 
been  open  to  the  gospel.  So  China  is  open,  and  along  all  her 
highways  the  servants  of  the  Most  High  God  are  free  to  travel, 
to  preach  the  gospel,  and  to  build  schools  and  churches.  Africa 
has  been  traversed  from  salt  sea  to  salt  sea,  from  the  Cape  to 
the  Pillars  of  Hercules.  The  Congo  Free  State  has  been  founded. 
This  State  has  a  population  of  fifty  millions,  and  missionaries 
are  permitted  to  enter  it  and  to  set  up  their  banner  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord.  With  the  single  exception  of  Thibet,  the  whole 
world  is  now  ready  to  receive  the  gospel.  Nations  that  once  sat 
in  darkness  and  sullenly  and  stubbornly  rejected  the  message 
of  salvation  are  now  asking  that  it  be  sent  to  them. 

A  brief  statement  of  what  has  been  accomplished  in  the 
difierent  missionary  fields  is  all  that  space  will  permit.  Work 
began  in  India  in  1813.  The  East  India  Company  was  hostile 
and  did  all  it  could  against  the  missionaries.  The  directors 
thanked  God  that  the  conversion  of  the  natives  was  impracti- 
cable. There  are  now  500,000  adherents  to  Christianity  in 
India.  Chunder  Sen  has  said :  "  India  is  already  won  for 
Christ.  None  but  Jesus,  none  but  Jesus,  is  worthy  to  have 
India,  and  he  shall  have  it."  Sixty-five  years  ago  there  was  not 
a  single  Christian  in  Burmah.  Now  there  are  84,000  adherents 
out  of  a  population  of  8,000,000.  Japan  did  not  permit  public 
preaching  until  1872,  though  certain  treaty  ports  have  been  open 
since  1853.  There  are  20,000  Christians  in  Japan.  The  triumph 
of  the  Gospel  in  this  land  is  the  miracle  of  the  age.  Morrison 
entered  China  in  1807.  His  work  was  done  in  secret.  In  a  deep 
cellar  he  translated  the  Bible.  In  1845  there  were  six  converts 
in  China ;  now  there  are  40,000.  Seventy-five  years  ago  Sierra 
Leone  was  without  the  Gospel.    The  people  represented  a  hun- 


380 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


di-ed  hostile  tribes.  They  had  no  morals,  and  were  brutal 
thieves  and  murderers,  crowding  together  in  filthy  huts  without 
even  the  conceptions  of  marriage.  Their  religion  was  devil- 
worship.  Jfow  out  of  a  population  of  37,000,  there  are  32,000 
professing  Christians.  Sierra  Leone  is  now  a  center  of  great 
missionary  activity.  The  Moravians  began  work  in  South 
Africa  in  the  last  century.  There  are  now  200,000  Christians  in 
South  Africa.  There  are  in  all  Africa  about  600,000  Christians. 
In  1800  the  people  of  Madagascar  were  all  idolaters.  The  first 
misiiionaries  were  told  they  might  as  well  try  to  convert  sheep 
or  cattle.  Now  there  are  230,000  adherents  to  Christianity  on 
that  island.  The  Bible  and  the  laws  of  the  realm  lie  side  by 
side  on  the  coronation  table.  A  great  work  has  been  done  in 
the  South  Seas.  John  Geddie  went  into  the  New  Hebrides  in 
1848.  He  found  the  people  cannibals,  without  clothing,  without 
a  written  language.  He  won  these  people  from  savagery  and 
superstition  to  civilization  and  to  Christianity.  They  have  sent 
150  of  their  ablest  men  and  women  as  missionaries  to  the 
adjoining  islands.  His  epitaph  is  this :  "  When  he  came  among 
us,  there  were  no  Christians;  when  he  left  us,  there  were  no 
heathen."  The  Sandwich  Islands  were  evangelized  by  mission- 
aries of  the  American  Board.  John  Williams  won  Samoa  to  the 
faith.  In  ten  years  30,000  believed  the  Gospel,  and  heathenism 
passed  rapidly  away.  John  Hunt  did  his  great  work  in  Fiji. 
He  found  the  people  degraded  and  demonized.  Whole  villages 
were  depopulated  simply  to  supply  their  neighbors  with  fresh 
meat.  Now  cannibalism  is  extinct.  There  is  not  a  single 
avowed  heathen  left.  Bishop  Selwyn  said  of  the  work  among 
the  Maories :  "  I  seem  to  see  a  nation  born  in  a  day."  Darwin 
thought  it  utterly  useless  to  send  the  Gospel  to  Terra  Del 
Fuego.  The  natives  seemed  to  him  to  be  the  troubled  spirits  of 
another  world.  He  did  not  think  that  all  the  missionaries  in 
the  world  could  make  them  decent  and  moral.  The  Fuegians 
have  been  won,  and  Darwin  spoke  of  their  conversion  as  most 
wonderful.    New  Guinea  was  entered  in  1871.    Already  six 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  QF  THE  WORLD. 


381 


hundred  miles  of  coast  line  have  been  opened ;  seventy  stations 
have  been  founded ;  six  languages  have  been  reduced  to  a 
written  form,  and  sixty  young  men  are  being  prepared  to  teach. 
In  Corea  and  Siam  the  work  has  been  auspiciously  begun. 

At  the  beginning  of  the  century  the  churches  were  opposed 
to  missions.  The  idea  of  sending  the  gospel  to  the  uttermost 
part  of  the  earth  was  regarded  as  the  very  essence  of  folly. 
What  was  done  was  done  by  a  few  earnest  souls  who  cared 
nothing  for  ridicule  or  opposition.  Now  we  can  speak  of  an 
army  of  laborers.  All  sections  of  Christendom  are  animated 
by  the  missionary  spirit,  and  the  missionary  spirit  is  every- 
where leading  to  missionary  activity.  We  are  now  in  a  mis- 
sionary century.  In  it  the  age  of  world-wide  missions  has 
begun.  More  than  any  of  the  generations  past  we  can  take  up 
the  sublime  words  of  the  Psalmist :  "All  the  ends  of  the  earth 
have  seen  the  salvation  of  our  God."  The  movement  was  never 
so  powerful  and  so  extensive  as  it  is  now.  It  is  wider  and  more 
systematic  than  in  the  medieval  or  apostolic  age.  It  is  larger 
in  the  results  accomplished  than  either  of  the  two  great  mis- 
sionary epochs  preceding.  We  can  now  speak  of  world-wide 
missions  as  we  can  speak  of  a  world-wide  commerce.  W^e  can 
say  of  the  missionaries :  Their  sound  has  gone  out  into  all  the 
earth  and  their  words  unto  the  ends  of  the  world.  In  the  Apos- 
tolic age  the  gospel  reached  as  far  as  the  limits  of  the  Roman 
Empire.  In  the  middle  ages  it  touched  a  rude  and  barbarous 
people  here  and  there.  Now  the  fixed  determination  of  the 
church  is  to  carry  out  the  great  commission  in  the  spirit  and 
in  the  letter  of  it,  and  reach  every  creature.  Never  were  there 
such  open  doors  of  opportunity,  never  such  providential  removals 
of  barriers,  never  such  grand  preparations  for  the  universal  and 
immediate  dissemination  of  the  gospel,  and  never  such  cheering 
results  in  the  work  of  missions.  The  church  is  taking  up  the 
old  watchword :  "  Christ  for  the  whole  world,  and  the  whole 
world  for  Christ." 


382 


THE  EVANGELIZATIOX  OF  TEE  WORLD. 


THE  MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCH. 

Our  risen  Lord  gave  one  charge  to  his  disciples.  The  work 
they  were  charged  to  do  was  to  evangelize  the  world.  They  were 
not  to  turn  every  one  from  the  error  of  his  way,  but  to  preach 
the  gospel  to  every  creature.  This  is  tlie  work  of  the  church. 
As  individual  Christians  we  are  to  make  our  own  calling  and 
election  sure.  We  are  to  cleanse  ourselves  from  all  filthiness  of 
the  flesh  and  spirit,  perfecting  sanctification  in  the  fear  of  God. 
But  when  we  have  done  all  that  we  can  do  to  make  our  charac- 
ters perfect,  we  must  not  think  that  we  have  done  our  whole 
duty.  We  are  to  work  out  our  own  salvation,  not  that  we  may 
selfishly  enjoy  the  blessing  of  redemption,  but  that  we  may  aid 
in  the  conversion  of  the  world.  As  members  of  the  body  of 
Christ,  we  are  to  provoke  one  another  to  love  and  to  good 
works.  We  are  to  edify  one  another.  But  that  is  not  all ;  nor 
is  it  the  chief  thing.  The  evangelization  of  the  world  ought  to 
be  our  supreme  concern. 

In  recording  the  last  command  of  our  Lord  not  one  of  the 
evangelists  alludes  to  what  we  owe  to  ourselves  and  to  those 
who  are  Christians  already.  The  commission,  as  given  by 
Matthew,  reads  thus :  "  Go  ye  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of 
all  the  nations,  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  the  Father  and 
of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost :  teaching  them  to  observe  all 
things  whatsoever  I  commanded  you."  As  given  by  Mark,  "  Go 
ye  into  all  the  world,  and  preach  the  gospel  to  the  whole  crea- 
tion. He  that  believeth  and  is  baptized  shall  be  saved ;  but  he 
that  disbelieve th  shall  be  condemned."  As  given  by  Luke  it 
reads :  "  Thus  it  is  written,  that  the  Christ  should  suffer,  and 
rise  again  from  the  dead  the  third  day;  and  that  repentance 
and  remission  of  sins  should  be  preached  in  his  name  among  all 
the  nations."  As  given  b}^  John  our  Lord  said :  "As  the  Father 
hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.  And  when  he  had  said  this, 
he  breathed  on  them,  and  said  to  them.  Receive  ye  the  Holy 


TEE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


383 


Ghost;  whose  soever  sins  ye  forgive,  they  are  forgiven  unto 
them  ;  whose  soever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained."  As  long 
as  He  was  in  the  world,  he  was  the  light  of  the  world.  Now  He 
was  going  to  the  Father,  and  they  were  to  be  the  light  of  the 
world,  and  they  were  to  let  their  light  shine  far  and  wide  that 
those  who  sat  in  darkness  might  be  guided  into  the  way  of 
peace.  Just  before  his  ascension  he  said  to  them:  "But  ye 
shall  receive  power  when  the  Holy  Ghost  is  come  upon  you ; 
and  ye  shall  be  my  witnesses,  both  in  Jerusalem,  and  in  all 
Judea  and  Samaria,  and  unto  the  uttermost  part  of  the  earth." 
These  are  his  last  words,  and  they  are  words  of  supreme 
moment.  On  the  day  of  Pentecost  the  promised  Spirit  was 
given,  and  their  work  began.  They  bore  witness  for  Christ 
everywhere.  They  published  what  they  had  heard  and  seen 
and  knew  to  be  true. 

The  commission  agrees  with  what  the  prophets  and  apostles 
have  written.  Thus  David  prays :  "  God  be  merciful  to  us,  and 
bless  us,  and  cause  his  face  to  shine  upon  us ;  that  thy  way 
may  be  known  upon  earth,  thy  saving  health  among  all 
nations."  He  does  not  so  much  as  mention  their  own  good  or 
enjoyment.  He  asks  for  mercy  and  for  spiritual  blessings  that 
they  might  be  able  to  communicate  them  to  others.  Isaiah 
said:  "It  is  too  light  a  thing  that  thou  shouldst  be  my  servant 
to  raise  up  the  tribes  of  Jacob,  and  to  restore  the  preserved  of 
Israel ;  I  will  also  give  thee  for  a  light  to  the  nations,  that  thou 
mayest  be  my  salvation  unto  the  end  of  the  earth."  The  church 
is  to  look  after  her  own  members ;  the  elders  are  to  feed  and 
to  oversee  the  flock ;  but  this  is  too  light  to  constitute  the  entire 
mission  of  the  church.  Her  business  is  to  seek  and  to  save  the 
lost.  Paul  tells  us  that  his  aim  was  to  preach  the  gospel  where 
Christ  was  not  already  named,  that  he  might  not  bnild  upon 
another  man's  foundation ;  but,  as  it  is  written,  "  They  shall  see, 
to  whom  no  tidings  of  him  came,  and  they  who  have  not  heard 
shall  understand."  In  the  parable  the  man  that  lost  one  sheep 
left  the  ninety  and  nine  in  the  wilderness,  and  went  after  the 


384  THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 

lost  one  until  he  found  it.  We  reverse  that,  and  do  more  to 
entertain  those  that  are  in  the  fold  than  we  do  to  save  those  that 
have  gone  astray.  It  is  not  thus  that  our  Lord  would  have  us 
do.  He  would  have  us  saved  and  blessed,  not  that  we  may  eat 
and  drink  and  be  merry,  but  that  we  may  contribute  to  the 
enlightenment  and  conversion  of  the  whole  world.  This  is  the 
great  work  of  the  church  to-day.  This  is  the  duty  of  every  one 
who  has  named  the  name  of  Christ.  We  are  to  save  ourselves ; 
we  are  to  build  one  another  up  on  our  most  holy  faith ;  but  that 
is  not  all :  we  are  to  help  evangelize  the  world.  This  duty  rests 
upon  us  as  heavily  as  it  did  upon  the  apostles,  if  not  more  so, 
on  the  ground  that  where  much  is  given  there  much  shall  be 
required.  We  have  facilities  and  opportunities  such  as  they 
had  not.  Steam  and  electricity  have  brought  the  heathen  world 
to  our  doors.  All  races  are  neighbors  now.  Commerce  is  world- 
wide. The  printing-press  has  enabled  us  to  multiply  the  word 
of  life  like  the  leaves  of  the  forest.  All  peoples  are  accessible 
now,  God  is  speaking  to  us  as  never  before,  saying :  "  Go  ye 
into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  gospel  to  the  whole  creation."' 
We  cannot  ignore  this  command  and  be  guiltless.  The  com- 
mand to  evangelize  the  world  is  as  binding  upon  us  as  is  the 
command  to  repent,  to  believe,  or  to  be  baptized.  Apart  then 
from  all  other  duties  of  the  church,  as  it  has  been  said,  rising 
far  above  the  claims  of  lands  already  Christian,  eclipsing  every 
other  obligation  which  God  has  placed  upon  the  souls  of 
enlightened  men,  is  the  duty  of  making  known  to  the  nations 
that  have  not  known  him,  the  fact  that  Jesus  Christ  has  come  to 
the  earth  as  a  divine  Savior. 

Let  us  inquire  how  the  church  has  obeyed  the  parting  com- 
mand of  her  Lord.  The  apostles  preached  ia  all  parts  of  the 
Roman  Empire.  Constrained  by  the  love  of  Christ  they  went 
everywhere.  Paul  said :  "  I  am  debtor  both  to  the  Greeks  and 
to  the  Barbarians,  both  to  the  wise  and  to  the  foolish."  He  said 
again:  "Unto  me  who  am  less  than  the  least  of  all  saints  was 
this  grace  given  that  I  should  preach  among  the  Gentiles  the 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


385 


unsearchable  riclies  of  Christ."  Nothing  could  daunt  his  lion 
heart.  He  knew  that  in  every  city  bonds  and  scourgings 
awaited  him,  but  none  of  those  things  moved  him,  neither  did 
he  count  his  life  as  dear  to  him,  if  he  could  finish  his  course 
with  joy  and  the  ministry  which  he  had  received  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  to  testify  the  gospel  of  the  grace  of  God.  In  that  age 
every  Christian  was  a  witness  for  Christ.  So  active  and  so 
aggressive  was  the  early  church,  that  Paul  in  his  day  could 
speak  of  the  gospel  as  being  preached  in  all  creation  under 
heaven.  In  the  fourth  century  the  Empire  became  Christian. 
In  the  Middle  Ages  Europe  was  won  to  Christ.  At  the  close  of 
the  fourteenth  century  all  missionary  activity  ceased.  Here 
and  there  a  man  like  Raimund  Lull,  or  Francis  Xavier,  or  Las 
Casas,  or  John  Eliot  did  something,  but  the  church  was  asleep 
or  engaged  in  fruitless  controversies.  For  centuries  nothing 
was  attempted  and  nothing  was  accomplished. 

When  the  era  of  modern  missions  began,  Christian  people, 
for  the  most  part,  were  either  hostile  or  indifferent.  The  efforts 
of  the  first  missionaries  were  greeted  with  universal  and 
unmeasured  ridicule.  The  men  who  were  agitating  this  ques- 
tion were  spoken  of  as  vermin  who  ought  to  be  caught  and 
cracked  and  exterminated.  What  is  being  done  now  is  the 
work  of  a  few.  Nine-tenths  of  all  the  contributions  come  from 
one-tenth  of  the  members,  while  one-half  give  nothing.  With 
the  Moravians  every  church  has  its  missions.  Every  man,  and 
every  woman,  and  every  child  has  an  interest  in  this  cause. 
But  the  Moravians  are  an  exception.  The  churches,  as 
churches,  are  not  responsible  for  the  maintenance  or  the  man- 
agement of  this  work.  What  ought  to  be  the  work  of  the 
church  is  left  to  such  churches  and  individuals  as  see  fit  to 
co-operate.  The  work  of  missions  is  not  now  the  chief  concern 
of  the  churches.  It  is  a  by-play,  instead  of  being  the  supreme 
business,  and  demanding  the  highest  talent  and  the  most 
devoted  service. 

We  are  in  the  last  decade  of  the  Nineteenth  Christian  Cen- 

25 


386 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WOULD. 


tury,  "but  the  world  is  not  yet  evangelized.  Two- thirds  of  the 
race  have  not  heard  that  Christ  died  for  them.  There  are  a 
thousand  millions  stumbling  on  the  dark  mountains  and  going 
down  to  the  pit  with  none  to  deliver.  Lord  Shaftesbury  has 
said  that  in  the  latter  part  of  these  centuries  those  who  held  the 
truth  have  had  it  in  their  power  to  evangelize  the  globe  fifty 
times  over.  All  Christendom  has  6,230  agents  in  the  foreign 
field.  Of  these  3,000  are  ordained,  730  are  unordained,  and 
2,500  are  women.  In  addition  to  these  are  S0,000  native  helpers. 
All  Christendom  gives  a  little  over  $12,000,000  a  year  to  support 
this  cause.  In  these  United  States  we  pay  one-sixteenth  of  one 
per  cent,  on  our  real  and  personal  property  for  the  greatest 
enterprise  on  earth.  Of  all  moneys  raised  for  religious  pur- 
poses, only  two  per  cent,  goes  into  the  mission  field.  London 
has  a  thousand  more  ordained  workers  than  all  the  pagan  world. 
In  this  country  we  have  one  preacher  for  every  eight  hundred 
people,  while  in  all  pagandom  there  is  only  one  ordained  mis- 
sionary for  every  four  hundred  thousand  people.  While  the 
church  is  thus  playing  at  missions,  a  thousand  millions  are 
living  and  dying  without  hope  and  without  God.  Thirty  mil- 
lions go  down  to  the  grave  every  j^ear  in  heathen  lands,  a 
hundred  thousand  a  day.  The  church  has  not  been  and  is  not 
in  earnest.  She  has  treated  the  parting  charge  of  her  Lor  1  as  if 
it  had  been  abrogated  long  ago.  Since  the  age  of  the  apostles 
the  evangelization  of  the  world  has  not  been  the  work  of  the 
church !  By  far  the  greater  part  of  her  resources  has  been  spent 
upon  her  own  instruction  and  edification.  She  has  put  that  last 
which  God  has  put  first,  and  has  reckoned  that  least  which  he 
pronounced  greatest. 

What  ought  we  to  do  in  the  premises  ?  We  should  realize, 
as  we  have  not  done,  that  we  are  called  of  God  to  evangelize  the 
world.  We  have  no  option  in  the  case.  If  we  would  be  loyal 
to  the  Captain  of  our  salvation,  we  must  obey  his  last  command. 
What  we  need  is  not  more  money,  but  an  entire  consecration  of 
what  we  have.    This  work  could  be  done  in  a  generation.  An 


THE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


887 


English  soldier  computed  that  the  English  army  and  navy  could 
reach  every  human  being  alive  with  the  Gospel  in  eighteen 
months,  if  that  duty  were  assigned  them.  If  it  were  our  heart's 
desiie  and  prayer  to  God  that  all  nacions  miglit  hear  the 
Gospel,  we  would  make  short  work  of  it.  The  truth  is  we  do 
not  feel  about  the  matter  as  we  ought.  A  few  are  doing  well. 
Of  them  it  can  be  said  that  to  the  extent  of  their  power,  yea, 
and  beyond  their  power,  they  are  willing  to  do.  Moffat  spends 
fifty  years  in  the  field,  and  then  regrets  that  he  cannot  be 
ground  out  a  young  man  that  he  may  sally  out  again.  Bishop 
Taylor  wishes  he  could  be  multiplied  into  a  thousand  men  and 
then  live  a  thousand  years  for  the  redemption  of  Africa.  A  rich 
man  like  Otis  gives  a  million  dollars ;  a  servant  girl  like  Mary 
O'Hara  gives  five  hundred  dollars.  But  what  is  needed  is  that 
all  should  make  this  work  their  chief  concern.  The  bulk  of  the 
church  are  asleep,  and  they  need  to  hear  the  voice  of  God  like  a 
fire-bell  at  midnight,  saying :  "Awake,  thou  that  sleepest,  and 
arise  from  the  dead,  and  Christ  shall  give  thee  light."  We  are 
not  interested  in  this  cause  as  we  are  in  business  or  in  politics. 
We  want  to  know  what  is  being  done  in  all.  parts  of  the  world, 
and  we  search  the  papers  that  we  may  learn.  We  should  be  as 
eager  to  know  what  is  being  done  to  evangelize  Africa,  China, 
Japan,  Asia,  and  the  Islands  of  the  Seas.  We  should  watch  to 
see  what  new  advances  are  made  into  the  kingdom  of  darkness, 
and  what  new  strongholds  are  won  and  held  for  Christ.  The 
average  Christian  knows  little  and  cares  less  about  the  cause 
for  which  Christ  laid  down  his  life.  We  must  inform  ourselves, 
and  thereby  feed  and  foster  our  interest  in  this  work. 

We  should  pray  for  the  success  of  this  enterprise.  We 
should  say  with  the  prophet,  "  For  Zion's  sake  I  will  not  hold 
my  peace,  and  for  Jerusalem's  sake  I  will  not  rest,  until  her 
righteousness  go  forth  as  brightness  and  her  salvation  as  a 
lamp  that  burneth."  The  request  that  comes  most  frequently 
from  missionaries  is  this :  "  Brethren,  pray  for  us."  Great  and 
effectual  doors  are  open  before  them,  but  there  are  many  adver- 


388 


TEE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


saries.  They  need  that  wisdom  which  is  profitable  to  direct. 
They  are  anxious  that  the  "Word  of  the  Lord  may  have  free 
course  and  be  glorified.  Our  prayers  ought  not  to  end  with  our- 
selves. It  is  right  to  ask  for  grace  and  strength  and  all  needed 
blessings,  but  we  should  seek  for  these  that  His  way  may  be 
known  on  the  earth,  His  saving  health  among  all  nations.  The 
first  half  of  the  Lord's  prayer  is  for  the  coming  of  the  kingdom ; 
it  is  not  until  we  come  to  the  second  half  that  we  ask  for  any 
personal  blessing. 

"We  should  encourage  a  great  many  more  gifted  young  men 
to  enter  the  field.  There  has  been  a  great  uprising  among  col- 
lege students,  but  if  all  would  go  who  signed  the  pledge,  they 
would  be  to  the  need  only  as  a  drop  in  a  bucket.  Those  on  the 
ground  are  doing  good  work,  but  what  are  they  among  so  many? 
If  every  one  had  a  thousand  tongues,  and  every  tongue  were  a 
trumpet,  they  could  not  reach  all  who  are  still  unevangelized. 
A  Brahmin  said  to  a  missionary:  "Do  the  Christian  people  of 
England  really  think  that  it  would  be  a  good  thing  for  the  peo- 
ple of  India  to  become  Christians?"  When  he  was  told  that 
they  did  so  think,  he  said :  "  Why  then  do  they  act  in  such  a 
strange  way?  When  there  are  vacancies  in  the  civil  service, 
there  are  numerous  applicants  at  once ;  when  there  is  a  military 
expedition,  a  hundred  officers  volunteer  for  it;  in  commercial 
enterprises,  also,  you  are  full  of  activity,  and  always  have  a 
strong  staff.  But  it  is  different  with  your  religion.  I  see  one 
missionary  with  his  wife  here,  and  a  hundred  and  fifty  miles 
away  is  another,  and  a  hundred  miles  in  another  direction  is  a 
third.  How  can  the  Church  of  England  expect  to  convert  the 
people  of  India  from  their  hoary  faiths  with  so  little  effort  ? " 
We  must  send  out  a  great  many  more  men,  and  we  must  send 
the  best.  The  early  church  understood  that.  Paul  wanted  to 
stay  in  Jerusalem,  but  the  Lord  said  to  him:  "Depart,  fori 
will  send  thee  far  hence  to  the  Gentiles."  In  Antioch  the  Spirit 
said,  "  Separate  me  Barnabas  and  Saul  for  the  work  whereunto 
I  have  called  them."    There  is  need  of  wise  master-builders  to 


TEE  EVANGELIZATION  OF  THE  WORLD. 


389 


lay  foundations  and  to  superintend  the  work.  And  there  is 
need  of  men  of  consecration  and  good  sense  to  build  thereupon. 
It  may  be  that  soine  can  go  at  their  own  charges.  In  the  Middle 
Ages  nobles  sold  their  estates  and  went  out  to  fight  the  Turks. 
There  are  forty  self-supporting  missionaries  laboring  in  connec- 
tion with  the  China  Inland  Mission.  Those  who  are  unable  to 
go  at  their  own  charges  should  be  sent. 

There  remains  much  land  yet  to  be  possessed,  but  we  are 
well  able  to  take  possession  in  the  name  of  the  Lord.  All  the 
signs  of  the  times  indicate  that  a  crisis  is  at  hand.  The  pow- 
ers of  darkness  are  preparing  for  a  mighty  conflict.  Skepti- 
cism is  compassing  sea  and  land  to  make  proselytes.  The 
works  of  Yoltaire,  Paine,  Hume,  Strauss  and  IngersoU  are  sent 
into  India,  Japan,  and  China.  The  real  Armageddon  is  about 
to  be  fought.  Of  the  ultimate  victory  there  can  be  no  doubt, 
for  the  mouth  of  the  Lord  has  spoken  it.  The  promise  of 
Jehovah  is  confirmed  with  his  oath.  But  he  expects  us  to  do 
our  part.  Every  Christian  must  come  up  to  the  help  of  the 
Lord,  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  against  the  mighty.  Then  we 
may  expect  to  see  the  kingdoms  of  this  world  become  the  king- 
doms of  our  God  and  of  his  Christ.  Then  may  we  look  to  see 
the  knowledge  of  his  glory  cover  the  earth  even  as  the  waters 
cover  the  sea. 


MEANS  OF  SPIEITUAL  GEOWTH. 


r.  D.  POWER. 

Growth  is  a  characteristic  of  all  life.  It  is  natural.  It  is  a 
vital  act.  The  child  grows  without  being  instructed  to  grow ; 
the  roses  grow  without  being  commanded  to  grow ;  the  Chris- 
tian grows  without  taking  thought  how  he  may  add  one  cubit  to 
his  growth.  The  child,  the  rose,  the  Christian  only  need  the 
conditions  in  order  to  grow,  and  these  conditions  are  all  sup- 
plied. The  conditions  of  growth  and  the  inward  principle  of 
growth  being  both  provided  by  nature,  all  that  man  has  to  do  is 
to  apply  one  to  the  other,  to  do  nothing  that  may  dwarf  himself 
or  pervert  his  nature,  to  suffer  himself  to  grow. 

The  great  purpose  of  the  Christian  institution  is  the  reforma- 
tion of  the  world.  To  the  principalities  and  powers  in  heavenly 
places  the  manifold  wisdom  of  God  is  to  be  made  known  by 
the  church.  The  establishment,  edification,  and  growth  of  the 
church,  therefore,  must  be  abundantly  provided  for  by  its 
Founder.  The  apostles  treat  of  the  church  under  the  figure  of 
a  building,  a  house,  a  temple,  a  habitation  of  God.  The  terms 
edify  and  edification,  in  reference  to  the  building  up  of  an  edi- 
fice, are  often  used  by  them  to  set  forth  the  advancement, 
enlargement,  improvement  and  adornment  of  the  church.  Of 
this  building  Jesus  Christ  is  the  chief  corner-stone  laid  by  the 
doctrine  of  apostles  and  prophets ;  the  living  stone,  elect,  prec- 
ious, tried  and  sure  ;  and  believers  in  Christ,  united  together  in 
one  body  upon  this  foundation  laid  in  Zion,  are  "  living  stones 
built  up  in  a  spiritual  house,"  constituting  "the  household  of 
God,"  or  "  the  household  of  faith."  The  vast  importance  of  the 
church  as  a  body,  united  and  developed  in  its  associated  capa- 
city, is  seen  here.    The  apostles  do  not  deal  with  disconnected 

(390) 


F.  ]).  I'OWEK. 


Frederick  D.  Power,  pastor  of  the  Vermont  Avenue  Christian  Church, 
Washington,  D.  C,  has  been  for  sixteen  years  located  at  the  capital.  He 
was  born  near  Yorktown,  ^'a.,  Jan.  2;>,  1851,  the  second  of  a  family  of  nine 
children.  His  parents  were  Dr.  Itobert  H.  Power,  of  Yorktown,  and 
Abigail  M.  Jcncks  of  DeRuyter,  N.  Y.  He  entered  Bethany  College  in  18G8 
and  graduated  in  1871.  He  began  preaching  at  eighteen  years  of  age,  was 
ordained  at  twenty,  and  located  with  three  country  churches  in  Eastern 
\'irginia.  In  1874  he  was  married  to  Miss  Emily  B.  Alsop  of  Fredericks- 
burg, Va.,  and  in  January  of  that  year  took  charge  of  the  Christian  Church 
in  Charlottesville,  Va.  He  remained  here  until  September  and  was 
appointed  Adjunct  Professor  of  Languages  in  Bethany  College.  He  taught 
in  tiie  College  until  yeiDtember,  1875,  when  lie  entered  upon  his  work  in 
Washington.  He  was  instrumental  in  building  a  new  house  of  worship  in 
Washington,  which  Avas  dedicated  in  January,  1884.  In  December,  1881,  he 
was  chosen  by  acclamation  cliaplain  of  the  47th  congress  and  served  two 
years  in  that  capacity.  He  has  siicceeded  in  building  up  the  church  in 
Washington  from  a  membership  of  15U  to  700,  and  a  second  church  was 
organized  in  April  with  200  members.  The  subject  of  this  sketch  is  six  feet 
in  height  and  weighs  175  pounds.  His  lectures  on  popular  themes  are 
pronounced  among  the  most  entertaining  and  instructive,  and  his  services 
are  in  frequent  demand  in  that  iield.  Bro.  Power's  position  at  the  Capital  of 
the  nation,  and  his  relation  to  the  late  President  Gartield,  who  was  a  mem- 
ber of  his  congregation,  in  those  trying  scenes  culminating  in  his  death  and 
burial,  have  brouglit  him  before  a  much  wider  public  than  tliat  of  liis  own 
brethren.  He  seems  admirably  adapted  to  the  important  station  he  occu- 
pies, and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  many  years  of  useful  labor  yet  remain  to  him 
in  that  great  center  of  our  national  life. 


MEANS  OF  SPIRITUAL  GROWTH. 


391 


individuals  striving  after  personal  edification.  The  doctrine  of 
Christ,  the  writings  of  his  inspired  ambassadors,  the  ordinances 
of  the  Lord's  house,  the  consolations  of  the  Spirit — all  in  their 
largest  measure  refer  to  brethren  walking  together  in  unity,  to 
disciples  joined  in  one  body  as  fellow-members  one  of  another, 
holding  fellowship  in  the  institutions  of  the  gospel,  and  partak- 
ing as  one  body  of  the  abundant  provision  made  in  the  infinite 
wisdom  and  grace  of  their  great  Head  for  their  comfort,  edifica- 
tion and  conquest.  It  is  a  great  mistake  to  suppose  that  sepa- 
rate from  the  church  the  means  of  grace  and  growth  in  divine 
life  may  be  fully  realized  and  enjoyed. 

As  the  head  of  the  body,  as  the  foundation  of  the  edifice,  the 
great  source  of  all  spiritual  life  and  progress  is  Christ.  Does  he 
not  say :  "  I  am  the  Vine,  ye  are  the  branches.  As  the  branch 
cannot  bear  fruit  of  itself,  except  it  abide  in  the  vine,  no  more 
can  ye,  except  ye  abide  in  me.  He  that  abideth  in  me,  and  I  in 
him,  the  same  bringeth  forth  much  fruit ;  for  without  me  ye  can 
do  nothing  ?  "  Does  not  Paul  tell  us  in  his  splendid  anatomical 
figure  that,  speaking  the  truth  in  love,  we  grow  up  in  all  things 
into  him  wliicli  is  the  head,  even  Christ:  from  whom  the  whole 
body  fitly  framed  and  knit  together  through  that  which  every 
joint  supplieth,  according  to  the  working  in  due  measure  of 
each  several  part,  niaketh  increase  of  the  body  unto  the  build- 
ing up  of  itself  in  love  ?  Is  it  not  expressly  declared  that  "  unto 
every  one  of  us  is  given  grace  according  to  the  measure  of  the 
gift  of  Christ,"  and  that  he  gave  some  to  be  apostles  ;  and  some, 
prophets ;  and  some,  evangelists ;  and  some  pastors  and  teach- 
ers ;  for  the  perfecting  of  the  saints  unto  the  work  of  minister- 
ing, unto  the  building  up  of  the  body  of  Christ:  till  we  all 
attain  unto  the  unity  of  the  faith,  and  of  the  knowledge  of  the 
Son  of  God,  unto  a  full  grown  man,  unto  the  measure  of  the 
nature  of  the  fulness  of  Christ  ? 

The  first  essential  of  growth,  then,  is  a  knowledge  of  Christ 
and  his  word.  The  holy  Scriptures,  of  which  Christ  is  the  cen- 
tral figure,  simple  and  unadulterated,  are  able  to  make  us  wise 


392 


MEANS  OF  SPIRITUAL  OBOWTH. 


unto  salvation,  contain  all  things  necessary  to  faith  and  godli- 
ness, and  are  profitable  for  teacliing,  for  reproof,  for  correction, 
for  discipline  in  righteousness,  that  the  man  of  God  may  be 
complete,  furnished  thorouglily  unto  every  good  work.  As  light 
in  the  darkness  of  ignorance,  superstition  and  sin ;  as  the  power 
of  God  unto  salvation  to  every  one  that  believes ;  as  the  water 
of  life  to  satisfy  the  thirst  of  the  soul ;  as  the  bread  of  heaven 
to  feed  the  spiritual  nature ;  as  the  sword  of  the  Spirit  to  cut 
away  all  false  growths  and  overcome  all  resistance ;  as  the 
store-house  of  all  things  needed  in  the  development  of  souls 
along  the  lines  of  the  only  perfect  life  the  world  has  ever 
known — the  word  of  God  is  revealed  to  us.  At  the  windows  of 
Scripture  God  pours  into  the  soul  the  radiance  of  his  Spirit,  and 
through  the  doorway  of  his  Word  he  sends  the  manna  that 
nourishes  his  needy  children. 

To  answer  its  great  purpose,  however,  the  Word  of  Truth 
must  be  rightly  divided.  Distinction  must  be  made  between 
the  dispensation  of  Moses  and  that  of  Christ,  between  the 
teaching  of  the  prophets  and  the  doctrine  of  apostles  ;  between 
the  will  of  God  with  regard  to  the  Jews,  and  the  will  of  God 
with  respect  to  us.  The  Chronicles  of  the  Old  Testament  do 
not  answer  the  question,  "  What  must  I  do  to  be  saved  ?  "  Nor 
does  the  Apocalypse  unfold  the  organization  and  office  of  the 
church.  The  Acts  of  the  Apostles  show  us  the  character  of 
conversion,  and  the  Epistles  set  forth  the  duties  of  the  subjects 
of  Christ's  kingdom. 

It  must,  moreover,  be  so  administered  as  to  give  each  his 
portion  in  due  season.  There  is  milk  for  babes  and  meat  for 
strong  men.  There  is  instruction  for  the  unbeliever :  "Believe 
on  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  thou  shalt  be  saved."  There  is 
instruction  for  the  believer :  "  Repent  and  be  baptized  every  one 
of  you,  in  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ  for  the  remission  of  sins, 
and  ye  shall  receive  the  gift  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  There  is 
instruction  for  the  believing  penitent :  "Arise  and  be  baptized 
and  wash  away  thy  sins,  calling  upon  the  name  of  the  Lord." 


MEANS  OF  SPIRITUAL  GROWTH. 


393 


There  is  instruction  for  the  obedient  penitent  believer :  "Add  to 
your  faith,  virtue  ;  and  to  virtue,  knowledge ;  and  to  knowledge, 
temperance  ;  and  to  temperance,  patience  ;  and  to  j)atience,  god- 
liness ;  and  to  godliness,  brotherly  kindness ;  and  to  brotherly 
kindness,  love."  There  is  suitable  food  at  the  gospel  feast  for 
all  that  hunger. 

Furthermore,  it  must  be  given  pure.  The  Bible,  the  whole 
Bible,  and  nothing  but  the  Bible  is  the  divine  pabulum.  A 
false,  perverted,  or  imperfect  growth  must  come  from  the  adul- 
teration of  this  teaching  with  the  commandments  of  men. 
Truth  is  the  very  soul  of  God,  and  that  men  may  be  godlike 
they  must  have  truth  in  its  purity  without  any  mixture  of  error. 
"As  new  born  babes,  desire  the  unadulterated  milk  of  the  Word 
that  ye  may  grow  thereby."  "  This  is  my  beloved  Son,  bear  ye 
Him." 

Here,  then,  are  the  fountains  of  divine  wisdom.  Most  excel- 
lent of  all  God's  gifts  for  the  edification  of  his  people  is  the  gift 
of  His  word.  Among  green  pastures  and  by  still  waters  the 
great  Shepherd  leads  his  flock.  Like  a  tree  planted  by  the  riv- 
ers of  water  which  bringetli  forth  his  fruit  in  his  season,  and 
Avhose  leaf  never  withers,  is  the  man  whose  delight  is  in  the  law 
of  the  Lord.  In  such  a  garden,  rooted  in  the  soil  of  divine  grace, 
watered  with  the  dews  of  divine  love,  and  trained  by  the  skill 
of  a  divine  hand,  the  growth  of  the  church,  day  and  night,  sum- 
mer and  winter,  must  be  beautiful  and  glorious  and  fruitful 
beyond  conception.  Without  these  advantages  there  must  be 
leanness,  famine  and  blight,  which  no  human  means  can  remedj^. 

Unfolding  the  divine  word  in  its  myriad  beauties  and  helps, 
we  find  prayer  instituted  as  a  means  of  growth  in  spiritual  life. 
Our  Lord  taught  his  disciples  to  pray,  "  Thy  kingdom  come,  thy 
will  be  done  in  earth  as  in  heaven.  Forgive  us  our  debts  as  we 
forgive  our  debtors.  And  bring  us  not  into  temptation,  but 
deliver  us  from  the  evil  one."  The  apostles  taught  the  churches 
to  pray  without  ceasing ;  to  pray  always  with  all  prayer  and 
supplication  in  the  Spirit,  and  to  watch  thereunto  with  all  per- 


394 


MEANS  OF  SriBITUAL  GROWTH. 


severance ;  to  come  boldly  to  the  throne  of  grace  that  they  might 
obtain  mercy  and  find  grace  to  help  in  every  time  of  need.  The 
kingdom  of  Christ  began  in  a  prayer-meeting,  and  the  early 
disciples  continued  steadfastly  in  prayers,  and  the  apostles' 
doctrine  and  fellowship,  and  in  the  breaking  of  bread.  All 
great  onward  movements  of  the  church  have  started  in  prayer. 
"Pray  to  the  Lord  of  the  harvest,"  said  Christ,  "that  he  may 
send  forth  laborers  into  his  harvest."  Paul,  the  greatest  of 
Christian  leaders,  began  his  service  praying,  and  over  and  over 
again  appealed  to  the  churches:  " Brethren,  pray  for  us  that 
the  word  of  the  Lord  may  have  free  course  and  be  glorified." 
Luther,  who  broke  the  spell  of  ages  and  gave  the  church  its 
mightiest  impetus  since  the  days  of  the  apostles,  was  a  man  of 
obstinate  pleading  with  God.  The  prayers  of  John  Knox  were 
feared  by  Mary  more  than  an  army  of  ten  thousand  men, 
Whitefield,  Wesley,  Payson,  Judson,  Livingstone,  were  all 
giants  of  the  closet.  As  the  church  prays,  the  church  grows. 
As  the  Christian  communes  with  God,  he  becomes  like  God.  As 
men  and  women  frequent  the  banqueting  house  of  their  Lord, 
evening,  morning  and  at  noon,  they  become  healthy,  vigorous, 
aggressive,  strong  in  the  Lord  and  in  the  power  of  his  might. 
Growth  in  piety  and  in  power  are  not  possible  without  the  spirit 
of  grace  and  of  supplication.  Prayer,  in  accord  with  the  teach 
ings  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  one  of  God's  indispensable  agencies 
for  the  upbuilding  of  the  kingdom  of  Christ  among  men.  It  is 
the  hand  of  God's  child  laying  hold  of  the  hand  of  his  Father, 
lifting  himself  and  being  lifted  into  a  serener  atmosphere  of 
happier  fellowship  and  of  nobler  achievement. 

Another  means  of  growth  is  the  public  worship  of  the  Lord's 
house.  Meditation,  prayer,  education  in  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
self-examination,  communion  with  saints,  are  all  helpful  agen- 
cies of  God's  grace  that  are  brought  to  bear  upon  the  soul  as 
the  sunshine  and  dews  of  heaven  upon  the  tender  and  growing 
plant.  Under  the  law,  God  ordained  the  public  worship  of  the 
synagogue,  and  the  very  name  church  applied  to  a  Christian 


MEANS  OF  SPIRITUAL  GROWTH. 


395 


society  indicates  an  assembly  for  sacred  exercises.  The  Holy 
Spirit,  through  the  Apostle  Paul,  counseled  the  Corinthians  con- 
cerning the  order  of  worship  when  they  came  "  together  in  the 
church,"  and  exhorted  the  Hebrews  "not  to  forsake  the  assem- 
bling of  themselves  together."  Here  the  church  publicly  con- 
fesses the  name  of  Christ,  sets  forth  her  faith  in  his  resurrection, 
and  proclaims  his  gospel  for  the  conversion  of  the  world.  Here 
the  ignorant  and  vicious  are  instructed  and  warned,  and  the  sor- 
rowing are  comforted.  Here  the  Holy  Spirit  diffuses  his  sancti- 
fying influence,  and  gives  foretaste  of  the  deep  and  hallowed 
pleasures  of  eternity.  Here  intercessions  and  thanksgivings  are 
made  for  all  public  and  private  interests,  and  the  principles  of 
morality  and  religion,  which  preserve  society  from  decay,  are 
published  to  all  men.  Here  the  obligations  of  State,  neighbor- 
hood, family  and  individual  life  are  enforced,  barriers  between 
rich  and  poor  are  broken  down,  and  the  vital  interests  of  piety, 
benevolence,  and  patriotism  are  inculcated.  What  has  so  great- 
a  tendency  to  quicken  faith,  to  promote  zeal,  to  enliven  devo- 
tion, to  elevate  morals,  to  build  up  men  and  women  and  little 
children  in  the  likeness  of  Jesus  Christ,  and  thus  to  advance  the 
growth  of  the  kingdom  of  God !  We  become  assimilated  to  the 
moral  character  of  tlie  object  we  worship.  He  that  worships 
Buddha  is  transformed  into  Buddha,  says  the  Buddhist.  To  the 
sacrifice  of  Hercules  none  were  admitted  that  were  dwarfs,  and 
to  the  worship  of  Bacchus  none  that  were  sad.  Odin  and  Thor, 
conceptions  that  were  blood  thirsty  and  cruel,  shaped  the  char- 
acter of  the  Northmen  so  that  death  in  battle  or  by  one's  own 
hand  alone  could  admit  to  the  halls  of  Valhalla.  Adoring  a 
God  of  love,  of  mercy,  of  justice,  of  righteousness,  men  become 
righteous,  just,  merciful  and  loving.  They  grow  to  will  what 
God  wills,  to  love  what  God  loves,  to  hate  what  God  hates,  to  be 
like  God. 

Finally,  the  Lord's  Supper  as  a  means  of  growth  is  easily 
first  among  the  public  exercises  of  the  assemblies  of  the  Lord's 
people.    An  ordinance  which  is  commemorative  of  the  Lord's 


396 


MEANS  OF  SPIBITUAL  GROWTH. 


death,  as  baptism  is  commemorative  of  his  burial,  and  the  first 
day  of  the  week  of  his  resurrection,  must  be  of  precious  moment 
and  of  invaluable  service  to  the  church.  Waiting  at  the  cross, 
crowded  with  memories  of  the  dying  love  of  Jesus  of  Nazareth, 
as  the  Son  of  Grod  and  Savior  of  the  world ;  solemnly  observing 
the  farewell  request  of  our  great  leader  and  exemplar,  "  Do  this 
in  remembrance  of  me,"  we  must  imbibe  his  spirit  and  be  trans- 
formed into  his  likeness.  In  all  the  world  millions  perpetuating 
his  memory  on  every  Lord's  day  in  this  simple  feast  must  keep 
alive  the  llame  of  Christian  zeal,  impress  mankind  with  the 
power  of  Calvary,  and  mightily  advance  the  Messiah's  kingdom 
as  nothing  else  can.  Hence  the  observance  of  this  institution 
upon  every  first  day  of  the  Aveek  by  the  primitive  Christians. 
The  Lord's  death  and  the  Lord's  resurrection ;  the  Lord's  day 
and  the  Lord's  Supper ;  the  Lord's  house  and  the  Lord's  table, 
were  forever  associated  in  the  assemblies  of  the  Lord's  people. 
The  departure  from  this  order  has  been  a  great  loss  to  Chris- 
tianity, and  with  the  restoration  of  this  ordinance  to  its  true 
position  must  come  great  gain  in  the  growth  of  the  Christian 
religion. 

These  are  means  of  grace  and  growth :  Bible  study,  prayer, 
the  public  worship,  the  institutions  of  the  Lord's  house. 
Through  these  channels  the  gracious  influences  of  the  divine 
Spirit  are  imparted.  We  do  not  have  to  make  these  conditions 
SiViy  more  than  the  plant  makes  air,  heat,  light  and  moisture. 
All  we  have  to  do  is  to  allow  them  to  operate  for  our  develop- 
ment, to  place  ourselves  in  a  proper  position  to  grow.  We  are 
not  born  full-grown  into  the  kingdom  of  Christ,  any  more  than 
the  plant  into  the  vegetable  or  the  child  into  the  animal  king- 
dom. We  do  not  spring  through  a  miraculous  conversion  to  the 
full  stature  of  spiritual  manhood.  The  very  idea  of  growth  is 
opposed  to  such  a  theory.  The  law  in  all  the  universe  of  Grod 
is  progressive.  "  Grow  in  grace."  "As  new-born  babes,  desire 
the  sincere  milk  of  the  Word,  that  ye  may  grow  thereby." 
"  Leaving  the  principles  of  the  doctrine  of  Christ — the  milk  of 


MEANS  OF  SPIRITUAL  GROWTH. 


397 


babes — let  us  go  on  unto  perfection."  "  I  count  not  myself  yet 
to  have  appreliended ;  but  one  thing  I  do,  forgetting  the  things 
that  are  behind,  and  stretching  forward  to  the  things  that  are 
before,  I  jDress  on  toward  the  goal  unto  the  prize  of  the  high 
calling  of  God  in  Christ  Jesus.  Not  that  I  have  already 
obtained  or  am  already  made  perfect."  Nor  do  we  continue  as 
infants  in  the  household  of  our  Father;  The  child  that  is 
checked  in  its  development  becomes  a  freak,  a  dwarf;  the 
prattle  of  the  babe  that  charms  us  becomes  the  gibberish  of  the 
idiot  that  fills  us  with  pain.  As  men  and  women  in  Christ 
Jesus,  w^e  are  not  called  upon  to  be  always  confessing  ourselves 
miserable  sinners.  A  ceremonial  religion  demands  this ;  a 
New  Testament  Christianity  exalts  us  above  this  condition  ;  an 
intelligent  and  faithful  use  of  the  means  of  grace  must  bring  the 
happy  consciousness  of  grow^th.  "  Behold,  now  are  we  the  sons 
of  God."  How  are  we  treating  these  agencies  ?  Does  the  soul 
hunger,  and  we  refuse  to  feed  it  ?  Does  it  pine  for  light,  and  we 
keep  it  in  darkness  ?  Does  it  long  for  showers  of  divine  favor, 
and  we  suffer  it  to  wither  and  waste  ?  Does  it  ask  for  bread,  and 
we  give  it  a  stone? 


CHEIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


BY  B.  W.  JOHNSOX. 
THE  HOPE  OF  THE  ANCIENT  WOULD. 

When  the  curtain  rises  in  the  drama  of  humanity,  one  of  the 
first  scenes  revealed  is  the  discussion  of  the  riddle  of  human 
life.  What  is  man?  Is  he  a  worm,  or  is  he  a  god?  When  he 
dies,  does  he  "surrender  his  individual  being  and  go  to  mix 
with  the  elements,  to  be  a  brother  to  the  rock  and  to  the  clod 
which  the  rude  swain  treads  upon?"  Is  he  dust  and  does  he 
return  to  dust,  or  has  he  a  divine  and  deathless  spark  which 
shall  survive  the  dissolution  of  the  body,  the  grave,  and  even 
the  wreck  of  worlds  ? 

Probably  no  one  of  the  mysteries  of  which  our  anxious  souls 
ask  the  solution  has  had  so  painful  and  absorbing  an  interest 
as  that  question  of  the  ages :  "  If  a  man  die,  shall  he  live 
again?"  When  the  first  parents  stood  over  the  bruised  body  of 
their  slain  second  born,  they  confronted  the  great  problem,  and 
it  is  hardly  indulging  the  imagination  to  suppose  that  the  heart 
of  the  great  mother  suggested  to  her  a  hope,  even  while  her 
tears  were  falling  over  the  sad  fate  of  her  son.  Since  that  first 
funeral  and  first  grave  of  the  world,  there  has  been  a  battle 
between  human  hopes  and  fears.  On  the  one  hand,  to  outward 
appearances  the  grave  seemed  to  end  all.  The  last  breath  is 
succeeded  by  the  death  pallor,  dissolution,  and  the  disappear- 
ance from  human  sight,  apparently  forever.  As  far  as  the  ken 
of  the  senses  can  go,  they  have  seemed  to  say  that  man  died 
and  perished  as  the  worm,  or  as  the  brute.  Where  are  the 
millions  of  the  fathers  of  our  race?  Where  are  the  storied 
heroes  of  the  past  ?  Where  are  the  pious  and  the  good  who 
served  the  world  so  well  that  it  will  not  let  their  memories  die  ? 


1!.  W  .  .lOIINSOX. 


Bartox  "W.  Johxsov  was  born  in  1833,  in  a  log  cabin  on  a  clearing  in 
Tazewell  County,  Illinois.  His  ancestry,  on  both  sides,  is  of  stock  which  had 
settled  in  this  country  before  the  Revolution;  his  father's  parents  were  (South 
Carolinians;  his  motlier  was  born  in  Tennessee.  His  early  education  was 
such  as  could  be  obtained  in  a  backwoods  scliool,  on  a  farm,  and  from  the 
few  books  iie  could  buy  or  borrow.  In  his  eighteenth  year  he  commenced 
to  study  at  AValnut  Grove  Academy,  now  Eureka  College,  where  he  attended 
for  two  years.  Then,  after  teaching  for  one  year,  he  Avent  to  Bethany  Col- 
lege in  1854.  At  that  time  the  college  was  presided  over  by  Alexander 
Campbell,  aided  by  such  professors  as  R.  Milligan,  W.  K.  Pendleton,  11. 
Ilichardson,  and  others  of  less  note.  Tn  lPo6  he  graduated  in  a  class  of 
twenty-seven,  the  lionors  of  which  were  divided  between  him  and  "\V.  A. 
Hall,  of  Tennessee. 

In  the  fall  of  1856,  he  engasred  in  a  school  in  Bloomington,  111.,  preaching 
on  Sundays  in  the  vicinity.  The  next  year  he  took  a  ))osition  in  Eureka  Col- 
lege, Avhere  he  remained  in  all  seven  years,  two  years  as  its  president.  Jn 
1803,  he  acted  as  corresponding  and  tinancial  seci'etary  of  the  American 
Missionary  Society,  and  was  re-elected  to  that  position  at  the  convention  of 
18(54,  but  he  declined  to  continue,  having  accepted  the  chair  of  matlieniatics 
in  Bethany  College.  Here  he  remained  two  years,  until  after  the  tle.ith  of 
Alexander  Campbell,  Avhen  he  returned  to  the  west.  After  a  pastoral  cliarge 
at  Lincoln,  111.,  he  accepted  the  presidency  of  O-kaloosa  College,  in  conni  c- 
tion  with  the  care  of  the  Church  at  Oskaloosa.  A  failure  of  health  compelled 
him  to  cease  tea  -hing  two  years  later,  hut  lie  continued  to  preach  for  the  con- 
gregation for  four  more  years.  In  the  meantime.  The  Evanoelist,  long 
published  as  a  nu)nthly,  had  assumed  a  weekly  form,  and  he  became  its  edi- 
tor. For  about  sixteen  years  he  has  been  engaged  in  editorial  work;  on  The 
EvAXOEi.iST,  in  Oskaloosa  and  Chicasro,  and  subsequently  on  the  Christiax- 
EvANdEi.iST  in  St.  Louis.  In  the  meantime  lie  has  written  several  books 
Avhich  have  had  a  wide  circulation:  T/ie  Vixion  of  iJie  Ages.,  Commentary  on 
John,  The  People^s  Testament,  in  two  octavo  volumes,  and  the  successive  vol- 
umes of  the  Ci'in'sfian  Le.s.s-on  Commenturi/,  from  1886  to  the  present  time.  In 
the  summer  of  1858  he  was  united  in  marriage  to  Miss  Sarali  S.  Allen,  of 
Bloomington,  111.,  who  has  made  him  a  devoted  and  self-sacrificing  compan- 
ion. Three  cliildren,  all  living,  have  been  borne  to  the  marriage.  In  his 
Bible  stuilies  he  had  been  made  to  feel  the  need  of  a  ptrsonal  knowledge  of 
the  pla 'cs  mentioned  in  the  Bible,  of  the  people,  manners  and  scenes  of  the 
east;  and  hence,  in  the  summer  of  1889  lie  crossed  the  Atlantic.  During  his 
absence  of  between  four  and  five  months,  he  visited  Great  Britain,  France, 
Switzerland,  Italy,  Greece,  Turkey  in  Asia,  Palestine  and  Egypt.  Tiie  en- 
forced absence  from  his  desk  was  of  great  advantage  to  his  health,  which  had 
become  somewhat  impaired  by  his  arduous  labors.  If  his  life  is  spared,  ad- 
ditional volumes  will  in  due  time  appear  from  his  pen,  which  are  already  in 
preparation. 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


399 


On  the  other  hand,  there  has  always  and  everywhere  been 
some  kind  of  intimation,  whether  from  without  or  within,  from 
nature  or  from  revelation,  which  has  filled  the  world  with  a 
vague  hope.  This  was  shown  when  the  old  patriarchs  so 
carefully  carried  their  dead,  even  from  afar,  to  the  cave  of 
Machpelah  in  the  Promised  Land.  The  aflicted  sage  of  the 
Land  of  Uz,  in  the  midst  of  his  sorrows,  cried  out  in  exultation 
as  his  soul  caught  a  glimpse  of  the  future  life.  When  the 
Egyptians  brought  their  dead  to  the  embalmer,  spared  no  art  to 
render  the  lifeless  body  imperishable,  laid  it  away  in  rock  hewu 
tombs  and  sealed  it  up  from  the  destroying  hand  of  time,  they 
did  it  in  the  hope  of  a  final  reunion  of  the  soul  and  body.  The 
great  sages  of  southern  Asia  attempted  to  solve  the  problem  by 
the  doctrine  of  the  transmigration  of  souls.  The  soul  which 
left  a  dying  body  entered  into  some  other  body,  whether  of 
man  or  beast,  and  lived  again.  The  Greek  myths  and  poets 
painted  the  Elysian  Fields  and  Tartarus  as  the  homes  of  disem- 
bodied spirits ;  the  Sagas  of  northern  Europe  pictured  Walhalla 
as  the  abode  of  departed  heroes ;  the  American  Indians  sent 
theirs  to  the  Hapjjy  Hunting  Grounds  ;  the  Chinese  worship 
their  ancestors  as  living  and  divine.  Indeed,  wherever  men 
have  been  found,  as  soon  as  their  language  and  life  is  under- 
stood, it  is  found  that  in  some  form,  however  vague  and 
imperfect,  their  thought  has  been  colored  by  an  intimation 
of  immortality.  So  general  is  the  diffusion  of  this  hope  that 
Cicero  in  his  Tusculan  Disputations  makes  the  argument  that  a 
universal  belief  can  only  be  accounted  for  by  referring  it  to 
a  divine  intuition,  and  hence,  that  the  belief  in  a  future  life  is 
due  to  God's  voice  in  the  human  soul  whispering  to  it  that  the 
grave  does  not  end  all. 

Yet  we  always  come  away  dissatisfied  after  endeavoring  to 
silence  our  fears,  and  to  give  our  hopes  a  basis  of  certainty,  by 
listening  to  the  arguments  drawn  from  human  philosophy. 
The  death  of  the  old  year,  the  suspended  life  of  the  winter 
season,  and  the  resurrection  of  the  spring  whisper  a  hope.  The 


400 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


transformations  of  the  worm  after  its  burial  in  the  chrysalis  to 
a  glorious  winged  life  seem  like  a  corroboration.  The  fact  that 
the  noblest  minds  are  often  found  in  those  "  whose  bodily  pres- 
ence is  contemptible,"  in  feeble  and  diseased  earthly  prison 
houses,  shows  that  the  life  is  something  distinct  from  matter. 
The  fact  that  we  often  observe  the  mind  in  a  slowly  dying  body 
as  vigorous  as  ever  until  the  moment  of  separation  seems  to 
teach  the  same  lesson.  Then,  too,  the  personal  consciousness 
of  every  man  declares  to  him  that  the  body  is  only  the  clay 
tenement  in  which  he,  the  Ego,  dwells.  I  speak  of  "my  arm," 
"my  head,"  "my  body,"  and  contemplate  them  all  as  my  serv- 
ants. I  do  not  regard  them  as  3fe,  but  as  Mine.  But  there  is 
something,  the  Ego,  that  is  myself,  and  it  is  impossible  to  think 
of  myself  apart  from  this.  This  self  is  one,  a  unit.  I  am 
therefore  conscious  of  an  existence  of  which  the  body  is  one  of 
the  possessions  and  the  dwelling  place.  Why,  if  this  some- 
thing is  not  the  body,  may  it  not  change  its  home  as  we  change 
dwellings,  and  take  another  dwelling  such  as  pleaseth  Him  who 
made  both  body  and  spirit  ? 

Then  again,  to  pursue  this  line  of  thought  a  little  farther, 
free  will  is  a  m.atter  of  consciousness.  We  know  that  we  weigh 
motives  and  exercise  choice.  We  know  that  we  are  free  moral 
agents.  But  matter  is  subject  to  immutable  laws.  Matter  can 
never  exercise  choice,  and  hence  is  not  a  moral  agent.  Mr. 
Darwin  says  that  "  free  will  is  a  mystery  insoluble  to  the  natu- 
ralist." If  matter  cannot  will,  and  we  can,  it  follows  that  there 
is  something  dwelling  in  our  bodies,  the  Ego,  which  is  not 
matter.  The  life  itself,  that  which  constitutes  our  personal 
identity,  must  then  be  immaterial  and  spiritual  since  it  is  not 
subject  to  the  laws  of  matter.  Hence,  the  dissolution  of  the 
body  does  not  necessarily  end  its  existence. 

And  there  is  yet  another  argument  which  has  carried  weight. 
The  lesson  of  God's  great  world  is  that  where  he  has  created 
wants  he  has  also  furnished  the  means  of  supplying  those 
wants.    There  are  mutual  correspondences.    Tliere  is  air  for 


C HE  1ST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


401 


the  lungs ;  light  for  the  eye ;  sounds  for  the  ear.  The  body 
hungers  and  thirsts  and  God  furnishes  the  harvest  and  the 
crystal  stream.  He  has  given  to  every  species  what  it  needs  in 
its  environment.  But  shall  we  say  that  the  great  Heavenly 
Father  has  provided  the  means  of  supplying  every  sense,  every 
lower  want,  and  yet  has  utterly  denied  the  intense  longing 
planted  in  every  soul  for  life  ?  "All  that  a  man  hath  will  he 
give  for  life ; "  ease,  property,  comfort,  home.  The  whole  soul 
cries  for  life. 

"  It  is  life,  whereof  our  nerves  are  scant, 
Thee,  O  life,  not  death  for  which  we  pant, 
More  life,  fuller  life,  is  what  we  want." 

Nay,  all  nature  declares  that  He  who  has  answered  every 
lower  want  of  our  being,  would  not  close  his  ears  to  the  uni- 
versal, never  ceasing,  agonizing  cry  of  his  children  for  life. 
Who  will  say  that  when  millions  of  hands  are  outstretched  to 
God  as  they  cry  for  life  that  the  Heavenly  Father  thrusts  them 
back  and  pushes  all  his  weeping  children  into  hopeless  graves  ! 

These  arguments  are  noted,  not  in  order  to  exhaust  this 
source,  but  to  indicate  the  kind  of  evidences  which  nature  pro- 
vides. Yet,  in  spite  of  all,  the  natural  world  has  left  man  with 
his  doubts,  his  hopes  and  his  fears.  If  there  was  a  Cicero  who 
could  argue  immortality  from  an  eternal  hope,  there  was  also  a 
Csesar  who  could  declare  in  his  speech  in  the  Senate  on  the  fate 
of  the  Cataline  Conspirators  that  death  is  an  eternal  sleep.  If 
there  was  a  Socrates  who  could  insist,  as  he  received  the  hem- 
lock, on  the  immortality  of  the  soul,  there  was  also  a  Cebes 
who  could  dispute  the  fact  of  future  existence  with  the  dying 
philosopher.  If  there  were  Platonists  who  declared  that  the 
soul  was  deathless,  there  were  also  Epicureans  who  claimed 
that  in  this  life  was  our  only  hope,  and  hence  that  it  was  the 
part  of  wisdom  to  give  full  rein  to  pleasure,  because  to-morrow 
we  die.  If  there  were  Pharisees  who  believed  in  a  future  world, 
there  were  also  Sadducees  who  denied  that  there  was  angel, 
spirit,  or  the  resurrection  of  the  dead.  Cato,  when  all  hope  of 
the  Republic  had  been  crushed  out  by  Caesar's  legions,  might 

26 


402 


CHRIST  AXD  THE  FUTUBE  LIFE. 


read  in  his  last  hours  Plato's  dialogue  on  the  immortality  of 
the  soul,  but  its  pages  furnished  no  prospect  which  stayed  his 
hand,  when,  in  despair,  he  turned  the  dagger  upon  his  heart. 

Indeed  there  was  little  in  the  vision  of  immortality  vouch- 
safed before  Christ  came  that  could  fill  men  with  joyous  hope. 
The  poets  could  touch  their  harps  to  sing  of  the  beauties  of  the 
Eh^sian  Fields,  but  the  departed  heroes  who  made  them  their 
eternal  abodes  were  empty  shades  who  looked  back  with  long- 
ing on  the  real  joys  of  the  earthly  life.  Socrates,  the  greatest 
saint  of  the  pagan  world,  could,  in  the  moment  of  departure, 
speak  words  of  consolation  to  his  weeping  friends,  but  in  the 
same  breath  he  declared  that  whether  the  change  would  better 
his  condition  he  could  not  tell.  Death  was  a  departure  from 
the  known  to  the  unknown ;  a  leap  into  an  unexplored  abyss 
awful  in  its  silence  and  mj'stery.  Even  Avhen  Plato  and  Cicero 
exhausted  their  powers,  all  that  they  wrought  was  to  convince 
their  countrymen  of  the  deathless  existence  of  the  soul.  Thej'' 
had  no  power  to  reveal  a  heaven  that  would  brighten  their  lives 
with  the  radiance  of  an  eternal  hope.  That  was  reserved  for 
Him  who  is  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life. 


LIFE  AND  IMMOBTALITY  BROUGHT  TO  LIGHT. 


We  have  just  seen  how  feeble  and  glimmering  was  the  light 
of  eternal  hope  in  the  pre-Christian  world  ;  too  faint  and  uncer- 
tain to  be  a  strong  power  and  consolation  when  the  great  horror 
of  darkness  came  down  upon  the  dj'ing  soul.  Men  might  sub- 
mit themselves  to  the  inevitable  decree  Avith  philosophic  resig- 
nation, but  there  was  no  glorious  hope  in  death.  The  sublimest 
height  of  the  old-world  faith  was  reached  when  the  Psalmist 
could  exclaim,  "Though  I  walk  through  the  valley  of  the 
shadow  of  death,  I  will  fear  no  evil."  There  was  no  voice  in 
all  the  ancient  world  except  that  of  a  jjrophet  who  caught  a 
glimpse  of  a  brighter  morning  and  put  in  words  the  hope  of  a 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTUBE  LIFE. 


403 


better  age,  which  could  cry  in  triumphant  exultation,  "  O  death, 
where  is  thy  sting?    O  grave,  where  is  thy  victory  now? " 

It  was  a  new  era  which  dawned  upon  the  world's  hopes 
when  the  Man  of  Calvary  entered  upon  his  work.  A  ne'.v  key- 
note is  at  once  discovered  in  history,  when  we  open  the  pages 
of  the  New  Testament.  "He  hath  abolished  death,  and  hath 
brought  life  and  immortality  to  light  through  the  gospel." 
From  some  cause,  the  old  fears  have  j)assed  away,  and  the 
world  is  stepping  to  the  music  inspired  by  a  new  hope.  The 
first  martyr  of  the  church,  in  the  crisis  of  his  fate,  has  a  vision 
of  the  opened  heavens  and  the  Risen  Lord,  and  dies  with 
praj^ers  upon  his  lips  for  his  murderers.  The  mightiest  apostle 
of  the  new  religion,  in  the  midst  of  a  life  of  "weariness  and 
painfalness,"  of  want,  suffering  and  ceaseless  persecution  and 
peril  of  death,  coidd  exclaim:  "Our  light  affliction  which  is 
but  for  a  moment,  worketh  for  us  a  far  more  exceeding  and 
eternal  weight  of  glory.  *  *  *  Yov  we  know  that  if 
our  earthly  house  of  this  tabernacle  were  dissolved,  we  have  a 
building  of  God,  a  house  not  made  with  hands,  eternal  in  the 
heavens."  And  when  his  weary  course  was  run  to  the  end,  out 
of  the  depths  of  his  Roman  prison  he  could  look  serenely  at  the 
scaffold  and  the  headman's  axe  prepared  for  him,  and  speak 
with  radiant  hope  of  the  "crown  of  righteousness"  which  would 
soon  rest  upon  his  immortal  brow.  If  I  had  to  choose  a  single 
sentence  which  would  compress  within  its  limits  the  attitude  of 
the  new  dispensation  with  reference  to  death  and  a  future  life, 
it  would  be  that  of  the  voice  from  heaven,  "Blessed  are  the 
dead  which  die  in  the  Lord  from  henceforth :  yea,  saitli  the 
Spirit,  that  they  may  rest  from  their  labors,  and  their  works  do 
follow  them."  From  that  time  onward  saints  could  be  found 
who  cheerfully  accepted  the  crown  of  martyrdom,  and  rejoiced 
that  they  were  counted  worthy  to  suffer  somewhat  for  a  Savior 
who  had  filled  their  souls  with  glorious  hope. 

Nor  is  it  difficult  to  account  for  this  blessed  hope  which  had 
been  begotten  in  human  hearts.    The  one  all-sufficient  explana- 


404 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTUBE  LIFE. 


tion  is  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ.  The  world  had  other  great 
religious  teachers  before  the  Man  of  Nazareth,  such  as  Moses^ 
Buddha,  Zoroaster  and  Confucius,  but  never  had  a  teacher,  Jew 
or  Gentile,  inspired  or  uninspired,  appeared  upon  the  earth  who 
had  dared  to  take  upon  his  lips  other  than  the  timid,  hesitating, 
lisping  words  of  mortal  man.  It  was  a  new  era  when  one  in  the 
flesh,  as  the  Son  of  Man,  could  declare  in  language  only  fitting 
for  Divine  lips,  "I  am  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life." 
Never  before  had  there  been  One  walking  among  mortals  who 
could  claim  the  high  prerogative  of  holding  the  keys  of  death 
and  Hades,  and  the  power  to  deliver  man  from  their  dominion. 
Never  before  had  prophet  or  sage  spoken  such  mighty  words  as, 
"The  hour  is  coming  in  which  all  that  are  in  their  graves  shall 
hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  Man,  and  shall  come  forth ;  they 
that  have  done  good,  to  the  resurrection  of  life,  and  they  that 
have  done  evil,  to  the  resurrection  of  damnation ; "  "  He  that 
believeth  in  me,  though  he  were  dead,  yet  shall  he  live,  and  he 
that  liveth  and  believeth  in  me  shall  never  die;"  "I  am  the 
Bread  of  Life ; "  "I  am  the  Way,  the  Truth  and  the  Life ; " 
"Hereafter  shall  ye  see  the  Son  of  Man  sitting  on  the  right  hand 
of  power,  and  coming  in  the  clouds  of  heaven." 

Such  Godlike  words  might  possibly  have  been  held  to  be 
the  wild  ravings  of  a  crazy  enthusiast  had  they  not  been  spoken 
by  one  who  was  Godlike  in  every  feature,  in  life,  in  teachings, 
in  death,  and  in  the  mighty  transforming  power  he  has  wrought 
in  the  history  of  our  race.  "Never  did  man  speak  like  this 
man."  "He  speaks  as  one  who  has  authority,  not  as  the 
scribes."  Never  has  the  earth  seen  a  teacher  of  such  equipoise, 
seemingly  such  a  master  of  every  subject;  never  at  a  loss,  never 
confused,  never  mistaken,  apparently  in  possession  of  the  keys 
of  all  knowledge,  and  familiar  with  every  mystery.  "  In  him 
was  no  darkness  at  all,"  and  to  him  all,  whether  past,  present 
or  future,  in  this  world  or  the  world  to  come,  was  clear  as  the 
sunlight  of  heaven.  It  would  be  utterly  impossible  that  a  char- 
acter so  peerless  in  the  judgment  of  all  the  world,  unbelieving 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


405 


as  well  as  believing,  should  speak  wild  and  foolish  words  on 
the  subject  of  death  and  future  existence.  It  is  contrary  to  all 
the  probabilities  that  one  who  had  analyzed  the  human  heart 
and  life  as  had  never  been  done  before  by  mortal  man,  one  who 
has  been  demonstrated  by  the  wisdom  and  experience  of 
eighteen  centuries,  to  have  spoken  calm,  deliberate,  unerring 
truth  on  ninety-nine  subjects  out  of  the  hundred,  should  have 
indulged  in  idle,  vain,  blasphemous  and  false  boastings  on  the 
hundredth  theme.  Is  it  conceivable  that  the  lips,  which  the  uni- 
versal judgment  of  man  declares  to  be  the  lips  of  embodied 
truth,  were  defiled  by  falsehood  when  they  declared  to  man  the 
words  of  Eternal  Hope ! 

There  is  another  aspect  in  which  Christ  and  the  Gospel  diflfer 
from  all  other  teachers  and  their  systems.  There  has  been  no 
founder  of  any  other  religion  who,  while  still  a  living  teacher, 
staked  his  religion  upon  his  triumph  over  death,  and  from 
whose  tomb  a  church  sprang  into  existence,  and  into  power, 
buoyant  with  the  hope  of  immortality  demonstrated  by  his  own 
resurrection  from  the  dead.  Judaism  left  Moses  sleeping  in  the 
lonely  sepulcher  of  Mount  Nebo.  No  Chinese  or  Buddhist  Bible 
tells  how  the  stone  was  rolled  away  from  the  sepulcher  of  Con- 
fucius or  Gautama,  and  how  they  rose  again  to  cheer  their 
despairing  disciples  by  their  presence  and  by  the  promise  of  a 
like  victory  over  the  grave.  As  far  as  the  dim  legends  of 
Zoroaster  tell  us,  when  he  died  he  went  to  the  same  "  towers  of 
silence as  all  his  followers.  The  Mohammedan,  borrowing  a 
hope  from  Christianity,  believes  that  his  Prophet  is  in  Paradise, 
but  has  never  dared  to  affirm  that  he  has  been  seen  by  mortal 
vision  since  his  body  was  j^laced  in  the  tomb  at  Mecca.  And 
in  more  recent  times,  though  Mormonism  adores  the  murdered 
Joseph  Smith  as  a  saint,  a  prophet  and  a  martyr,  as  well  as  the 
founder  of  their  faith,  they  have  never  risked  the  proclamation 
of  his  resurrection  from  the  dead. 

In  contrast  with  all  other  religions  of  humanity,  Christianity 
bounded  into  existence  big  with  the  hope  of  immortality,  and 


406 


CHBIST  AND  THE  FUTUBE  LIFE. 


pointed  to  the  empty  tomb  and  to  the  Risen  Lord  as  the  demon- 
stration of  its  hope.  Peter,  a  craven  while  his  Lord  was  in  the 
hands  of  his  enemies,  has  now  been  transformed  by  some  new 
element  into  a  hero,  and  fifty  days  after  the  tragedy  of  the 
cross,  declares  to  the  men  who  had  crucified  his  Master,  "Him 
*  *  whom  ye  have  taken,  and  by  wicked  hands  have  cruci- 
fied and  slain,  God  hath  raised  up.  *  *  Whereof  we 
all  are  witnesses and  the  Twelve  who  fled  in  terror  w^heu 
tbeir  leader  was  seized,  "all  witness  with  great  power  of  the 
resurrection  of  the  Lord  Jesus."  The  burden  of  every  sermon 
was  the  resurrection  of  the  Savior,  and  eternal  life.  So  it  was 
in  the  first  sermon ;  so  it  was  again  in  the  discourse  at  the  Beau- 
tiful Gate.  The  one  thing  that  turned  upon  the  church  the  rage 
of  the  Sadducean  rulers  was  that  "  they  were  grieved  that  the 
apostles  taught  the  people,  and  preached  through  Jesus  the  res- 
urrection from  the  dead."  Indeed,  the  gospel,  which  in  its 
mighty  workings  wrought  out  a  church  whose  progress  could 
not  be  stayed  by  sword  or  fagot,  or  by  all  the  might  of  Sanhe- 
drim or  Caesar,  was  the  gospel  of  a  Risen  Lord.  That  was  the 
"old  Jerusalem  gospel,"  and  it  was  no  less  the  gospel  which 
wrought  out  the  transformation  of  the  Gentile  world.  "  I  deliv- 
ered unto  you,"  writes  the  greatest  of  the  apostles  to  a  Gentile 
church  which  he  had  founded,  "first  of  all  that  which  I  also 
received,  how  that  Christ  died  for  our  sins  according  to  the 
Scriptures ;  and  that  he  was  buried,  and  that  he  rose  again  the 
third  day  according  to  the  Scriptures." 

The  faith  of  Christianity  that  "Christ  is  the  Resurrection 
and  the  Life,  and  that  he  rose  from  the  tomb  as  the  first  fruits 
of  them  that  slept,"  is  a  full  explanation  of  the  new  hope,  joy 
and  inspiration  which  came  into  human  life  from  the  tomb  of 
our  Lord. 

THE  BASIS  OF  OUR  HOPE. 

Future  existence  is  not  future  life  in  the  full  and  blessed 
sense  in  which  the  phrase  is  used  by  our  Savior.    Even  the 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


407 


wicked  may  exist  "  wliere  the  worm  dieth  not,  and  the  fire  is  not 
quenched.''  Nor  is  existence  here  on  earth  recognized  by  him 
as  life.  In  him  was  life,  and  in  him  The  Life  walked  and 
moved  in  a  world  that  was  lying  dead  in  trespasses  and  sins, 
which  he  invited  to  him  in  order  that  he  might  have  life.  Those 
who  received  him  were  born  to  a  new  life  received  from  him, 
and  henceforth  were  moved  by  the  power  of  an  eternal  hope. 
For  them  eternal  life  had  begun,  and  what  we  call  death  was 
only  a  transit  to  a  higher  stage  of  its  existence  in  which  all  the 
ills  of  "  this  present  evil  world  "  were  left  behind. 

Hence  the  intimations  of  nature  that  the  spirit  of  man  sur- 
vives the  passage  of  death  fall  short,  when  we  seek  proof  from 
these  sources  of  the  blissful  immortality  which  is  the  promised 
inheritance  of  the  Christian.  If  I  were  asked  for  the  basis  on 
which  our  hope  of  a  happy  state  in  the  eternal  world  rests,  and 
was  required  to  give  the  answer  in  a  single  word,  that  word 
would  be  Christ.  Upon  him  hang  all  our  hopes.  In  him  all 
proofs  center.  He  is  the  Light  that  illumines  not  only  this 
world,  but  which  casts  its  rays  through  the  gloom  that  gathers 
around  the  mysteries  of  death,  and  reveals  a  Better  Land.  To 
me  the  future  is  not  hopeless  death,  nor  even  a  shadowy  and 
uncertain  existence,  but  a  joyous  and  inspiring  hope,  because  1 
believe  with  all  my  heart  that  Jesus  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God.  It  is  he  "  who  hath  abolished  death,  and  hath  brought 
life  and  immortality  to  light."  When  the  stone  was  rolled 
from  the  door  of  the  sepulclier  in  v>^hich  the  body  was  lain  it 
was  rolled  from  the  hopes  of  humanity,  and  when  he  came  forth 
living  it  was  not  only  a  triumph  over  death,  but  the  beginning 
of  a  new  era,  the  birth  of  a  new  world. 

I  shall  not  take  space  to  discuss  the  proofs  of  the  resurrec- 
tion of  the  crucified  Lord.  They  have  been  ably  considered  in 
other  portions  of  the  series  to  which  I  am  only  contributing  a 
part.  It  is  sufficient  now  to  quote  the  testimony  of  Dr.  Thomas 
Arnold,  of  Rugby,  Regius  Professor  of  History  in  the  University 
of  Oxford,  and  himself  the  author  of  a  number  of  valuable  his- 


408 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTLEE  LIFE. 


torical  works,  who  declares  :  "  I  have  been  used  for  many  years 
to  study  the  history  of  other  times,  and  to  examine  and  weigh 
the  evidence  of  those  who  have  written  about  them ;  and  I  know 
of  no  one  fact  in  the  history  of  mankind  which  is  proved  by 
better  and  fuller  evidence  of  every  sort,  to  the  mind  of  a  fair 
inquirer,  than  that  Christ  died  and  rose  again  from  the  dead." 
'•"VYhy  should  it  be  thought  incredible  that  one  should  rise 
from  the  dead?"  Indeed,  this  is  far  less  incredible  than  to 
believe  that  the  church  which  rose  out  of  the  tomb  of  Christ, 
based  upon  faith  in  his  resurrection,  was  based  upon  a  delusion ; 
that  the  suffering  martyrs,  who  gave  up  all  that  the  world 
values,  and  endured  every  trial  and  sorrow  that  causes  the 
world  to  shrink  and  shudder,  were  either  deceived  by  the  con- 
viction that  they  had  seen  the  Risen  Lord,  or  were  deceivers ; 
and  that  Saul  of  Tarsus,  the  bitterest  of  persecutors,  was  trans- 
formed into  the  saintly  Paul,  the  apostle,  the  apostle  of  prisons, 
stripes,  weariness,  painfulness,  hunger,  cold  and  nakedness,  by 
an  optical  illusion!  The  resurrection  of  Jesus  Christ  must  be 
accepted  as  a  historical  fact,  unless  we  plant  ourselves  upon  the 
dictum  of  Hume,  accepted  by  Huxley,  that  "no  testimony  can 
prove  a  miracle." 

Yet,  if  the  resurrection  of  Jesus  stood  alone  it  would  not 
furnish  an  impregnable  basis  for  our  hope.  If  the  voice  of 
Jesus  had  remained  silent  concerning  the  wonders  of  the  divine 
love,  and  there  had  no  promise  of  eternal  life  for  man  fallen 
from  his  lips,  we  would  still  be  left  in  doubt  concerning  our 
future.  Indeed,  the  resurrection  did  not  take  place,  primarily, 
in  order  to  demonstrate  that  we  should  live  beyond  the  tomb. 
It  was  the  primary  purpose  of  the  resurrection  to  demonstrate 
that  the  crucified  Jesus  was  the  Clirist,  the  Son  of  God.  The 
Sanhedrim  condemned  him  to  death  for  blasphemy  because,  in 
reply  to  their  own  question,  he  had  afhrmed  his  high  claims. 
When  they  had  nailed  him  to  the  cross,  Sanhedrists,  populace, 
and  Roman  soldiers,  all  taunted  him  with  his  inability  to  prove 
that  he  was  the  Christ  by  coming  down.    And  v/hen  the  lifeless 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


409 


body  was  sealed  in  the  tomb,  they  felt  that  the  demonstration 
was  complete,  that  he  was  either  a  deluded  fanatic  or  an 
impostor.  So  it  would  have  been  had  the  tomb  held  him.  Had 
he  seen  corruption,  the  lot  of  mortality,  his  very  name  would 
have  been  forgotten.  But  he  had  affirmed,  "On  tliis  rock,''''  the 
rock  of  the  fundamental  truth  that  he  is  the  Christ,  the  Son  of 
God,  "I  will  build  my  church,  and  the  gates  of  Hades  (the  great 
unseen  world  of  death)  shall  not  prevail  against  it."  The  Jewish 
nation  declared  that  these  gates  should  prevail,  and  that  ques- 
tion between  the  words  of  Christ  and  the  Sanhedrim  was  at 
issue  during  the  three  days  that  the  stone  closed  the  door  of  the 
sepulcher,  and  of  human  hopes. 

But  on  that  glad  Sunday  morning  the  stone  was  rolled 
away !  The  sepulcher  was  empty !  The  Lord  is  risen  indeed ! 
The  accounts  of  the  women  were  not  idle  tales.  Simon  hath 
seen  him !  Nay,  all  have  seen  him  but  the  skeptical  Thomas. 
Nay,  one  week  later,  Thomas,  convinced,  exclaims,  "My  Lord 
and  my  God ! "  Five  hundred  disciples  see  him  at  once,  and 
last  of  all,  as  one  born  out  of  due  time,  the  raging  persecutor 
sees  him  on  the  way  to  Damascus.  Then  on  Pentecost,  a 
mighty  power  descends  on  the  little  band  of  saints,  and  as 
Israel  gathered  in  wonder,  Peter  declared  to  the  men  of  Judea 
and  Jerusalem  that  "Him  whom  ye  have  taken,  and  with 
wicked  hands  crucified  and  slain,  God  TiatJi  raised,  having 
loosed  the  pangs  of  death,  because  it  was  not  possible  that  he 
be  holden  of  it.     *  *     This  Jesus  hath  God  raised  up, 

whereof  we  all  are  witnesses.     *  *     *     God  hath  made 

that  same  Jesus,  whom  ye  have  crucified,  both  Lord  and 
Christ."  The  gates  of  Hades  did  not  prevail  against  this  grand 
truth,  the  foundation  of  the  church.  The  resurrection  demon- 
strates that  Jesus,  the  condemned,  the  crucified,  is  both  Lord 
and  Christ. 

But  if  Lord  and  Christ,  the  seal  of  the  living  God  is  placed 
upon  every  word  that  has  fallen  from  his  tongue.  When  he,  in 
the  flesh,  uttered  those  words  iu  which  Omnipotence  seemed  to 


410 


CEBIST  AXD  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


speak  witli  human  lips,  "  I  am  the  Resurrection  and  the  Life ; 
"  I  am  come  that  je  mar  have  life,  and  have  it  more  abund- 
antly;"  "Because  I  live,  ye  shall  live  also;"  "He  that  liveth 
and  believeth  in  me  shall  never  die ; "  "  They  that  are  in  their 
graves  shall  hear  the  voice  of  the  Son  of  Man,  and  they  that 
hear  shall  live  ; "  and  when  he  declared  that  in  the  last  day  he 
should  say  to  his  followers,  "  Come,  je  blessed  of  my  Father, 
inherit  the  kingdom  prepared  for  you ; "  when  he  uttered  these 
and  many  other  words  equally  gracious,  it  was  the  voice  of  him 
who  holds  the  Keys  of  Life,  of  Death  and  Hades,  which  spoke. 
When  he,  whom  the  resurrection  demonstrates  to  be  the 
"Brightness  of  the  Father's  glory,"  speaks,  we  Avho  have  heard 
him  have  heard  the  voice  of  the  Father,  whose  otfspring  we  are. 
And  we  know  that  if  we  have  fellowshi})  with  his  life  and  death 
that  we  shall  have  the  fellowship  of  his  resurrection  also.  He 
is  Life ;  he  is  Immortality.    Because  he  lives  we  shall  live  also. 

Yet  one  more  sweet  thought  full  of  hope  comes  from  the 
demonstration  that  Jesus  came  into  the  world  to  show  us,  not 
only  the  Father's  will,  but  the  Father  Himself.  In  him  we 
behold  how  the  Father  loves  us.  We  hear  it  in  his  words.  He 
tells  us  that  if  we  want  a  definition  of  God,  it  is  comprehended 
in  the  one  word  Love.  Yet  love  will  never  let  what  is  loved  die 
if  it  can  have  its  will.  He  who  loves  a  flower  or  a  singing  bird, 
is  saddened  if  it  dies.  A  mother's  love  would  hold  back  her 
child  as  it  is  drawn  towards  the  gates  of  death,  and  would  even 
give  her  own  life  that  it  might  live.  Love  would  alwaj's  dower 
the  loved  one  with  life.  Hence,  when  we  look  up  to  the  great 
God,  and  know  as  we  see  his  face  that  we  are  gazing  upon  the 
depths  of  an  utterable  love,  then  there  comes  to  us  the  unfalter- 
ing conviction  tliat  the  Omnipotent  Father  is  not  deaf  to  his 
children's  cry,  will  not  thrust  back  the  hands  extended  in  sup- 
plication, and  that  even  of  his  own  will,  because  love  is  not 
death,  but  life,  he  will  dower  them  with  immortality  and  eternal 
peace. 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


411 


THE  HOPE  OF  THE  SAINTS. 

When  the  risen  Lord  finally  bade  adieu  to  his  disciples  on 
the  eastern  slope  of  the  Mount  of  Olives  and  disappeared  be- 
hind the  curtain  of  the  clouds,  he  left  behind  him  a  great  and 
inspiring  hope.  That  hope  not  only  changed  the  lives  of  the 
disciples  who  had  followed  him  on  the  earth,  but  has  changed 
the  current  of  human  history.  It  was  that  which  made  the 
saints  of  the  apostolic  age  disdain  threats,  trials,  hardships, 
poverty,  prisons,  scourgings,  sword  and  fagot,  and  move 
steadily  onward  in  the  work  of  imparting  to  the  world  their 
own  blessed  hope.  It  was  the  assurance  of  a  glorious  immor- 
tality bestowed  by  Christ,  and  in  fellowship  with  Christ,  that 
led  those  who  turned  away  from  Judaism  or  Paganism  to  the 
gospel  to  seek  to  purify  themselves  even  as  he  is  pure.  When 
the  philosophical  historian  seeks  to  account  for  the  wonderful 
change  that  gradually  shows  itself  in  the  moral  condition  of  the 
world,  he  cannot  fail  to  recognize  the  new  hope  as  one  of  the 
most  powerful  factors.  Pliny,  in  the  closing  years  of  the  first 
century,  takes  note  of  the  fact  that  this  hope  had  disarmed  the 
persecuting  power  of  imperial  Rome  of  all  its  terrors.  What 
cared  the  saint  for  the  flames  of  martyrdom  when  he  felt  a  firm 
assurance  that  they  were  only  another  chariot  of  fire  which 
would  carry  him,  like  the  Tishbite,  up  to  heaven  and  to  God  ? 

What  was  the  nature  of  this  hope  which  has  been  such  an 
inspiration  to  mankind  ?  When  the  Lord  was  about  to  go  away 
from  the  earth  he  assured  his  disciples  that  he  was  going  in 
order  to  prepare  a  place  for  them  in  his  Father's  house,  and  that 
he  would  return  to  take  them  to  himself  that  they  might  dwell 
there  with  him.  There  seems  good  reason  for  believing,  not- 
withstanding the  positive  statements  of  the  Savior,  that  the 
time  of  his  second  personal  coming  was  known  only  to  the 
Father,  that  the  early  church  was  in  expectation  of  his  speedy 
appearance  once  more  upon  the  earth.    Yet  they  soon  realized 


412  CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 

the  fulfillment  of  the  promise  in  their  own  experiences.  He 
came  to  Stephen  when  he  was  suffering  a  martyr's  death,  and 
the  dying  saint  was  permitted  to  look  up  and  see  the  heavens 
opened  and  the  Lord  standing  ready  to  receive  him.  So  be* 
came  to  James,  the  brother  of  John,  when  he  was  killed  by  the 
sword  of  Herod.  So  he  came  to  apostles,  saints  and  martyrs, 
and  they  obeyed  the  summons  in  the  joyful  expectation  that 
what  men  call  death  is  a  deliverance,  a  great  gain,  a  release 
from  bondage,  the  passage  to  eternal  honors. 

The  first  fact  that  I  wish  to  lay  emphasis  upon  is,  that  they 
regarded  death  as  an  immediate  deliverance.  There  was  no 
thought  of  a  sleep  of  ages  upon  ages  before  the  eternal  awak- 
ening. There  is  no  hint  of  a  long  period  of  unconsciousness 
which  lasts  nntil  the  final  trumpet  of  the  archangel.  There 
was  no  cloud  across  the  heaven  of  their  hope  which  suggested 
years  or  centuries  of  purgatorial  suflering.  On  the  other  hand, 
the  saints  closed  their  eyes  on  tlie  scenes  of  earth  with  the 
belief  that  they  would  at  once  open  them  in  the  brightness  of 
that  country  which  needs  no  sun.  To  the  penitent  suiferer  b}' 
his  side  the  dying  Savior  said,  ^'■To-day  shalt  thou  be  Avith  me 
in  Paradise."  As  the  martyred  Stephen  was  suffering  his  death 
wounds,  he  saw  the  heavens  already  opened  to  receive  him. 
The  apostle  Paul  declares  that  if  the  earthly  body  is  dissolved, 
there  is  ready  another  body,  "  a  building  of  God,  a  house  not 
made  with  hands,  eternal  in  the  heavens,"  and  declares  that 
"  we  groan  "  while  clothed  in  the  flesh  for  the  heavenly  clothing 
which  our  spirits  shall  wear  when  the  earthl}^  garments  of  the 
flesh  shall  be  laid  aside.  In  the  same  connection  (2  Cor.  chap.  5) 
he  says  that  to  dwell  in  the  body  is  to  be  absent  from  the  Lord, 
and  he  declares  that  he  would  "  rather  be  absent  from  the  bod}^, 
and  to  be  present  with  the  Lord."  And  again,  in  writing  to  the 
Philippians  he  declares  that  for  him  to  die  would  be  gain ;  yet 
for  him  to  continue  to  live  in  the  jiesli  is  of  advantage  to  the 
churches ;  hence  he  "  is  in  a  strait  between  two,  having  a  desire 
to  depart  and  to  he  with  Christ,  which  is  better."   In  the  Pauline 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FVTUEE  LIFE. 


413 


theology  death  is  simply  the  departure  of  the  spirit  from  the 
body.  In  the  case  of  the  Christian,  the  earthly  tabernacle  is 
dissolved,  he  departs  from  it ;  he  then  receives  a  new  body  fitted 
to  his  new  sphere  of  existence;  a  spiritual  body,  a  "building 
of  God ; "  to  depart  from  the  body  is  to  "  be  with  Christ,"  or  to 
listen  to  his  call  and  go  to  dwell  with  him,  and  such  a  depar- 
ture is  "gain,"  "better"  than  to  remain  " in  the  flesh."  This 
theology  harmonizes  fully  with  the  facts  stated  in  three  of  the 
gospels  and  alluded  to  by  both  Peter  and  John,  that  two  of  the 
Old  Testament  saints  came  back  from  their  immortal  homes  to 
stand  with  Christ  on  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration  and  to  con- 
verse with  him  over  his  approaching  sufiering.  It  is  in  full 
harmony  with  the  picture  drawn  of  the  future  life  by  the  Savior 
himself,  in  which  he  portrays  all  of  the  earthly  actors  in  the 
parable  of  the  Rich  Man  and  Lazarus  as  existing  consciously 
i:i  the  future  world,  and  Abraham  and  Lazarus  as  enjoying  the 
bliss  of  Paradise.  The  New  Testament  hope  of  immortality, 
inspired  by  the  gospel  of  Jesus  Christ,  is  a  hope  of  an  imme- 
diate passage  through  the  darkness  of  death  to  the  light  of 
eternal  day ;  of  a  deliverance  from  the  pangs  of  the  dying  body 
to  eternal  bliss;  of  ending  the  journey  of  life  by  passing 
through  the  gates  of  that  eternal  city  which  has  been  sought  by 
the  saintly  pilgrims  of  all  the  ages. 

"  But  some  will  say,  How  are  the  dead  raised  up  ?  And  with 
what  body  do  they  come  ? "  Surely  not,  as  Mohammedans 
believe,  with  the  bones,  flesh  and  blood  of  the  earthly  body, 
even  to  the  point  that  where  limbs  are  amputated  here,  they  are 
lost  to  the  body  forever.  Certainly  not,  as  Talmage  has  so 
vividly  described,  with  the  old  body  formed  again  by  its  scat- 
tered members  being  drawn  together,  from  v/lierever  they  have 
been  dissolved,  back  again  into  the  original  earthly  form. 
Rather,  in  the  vigorous  language  of  the  great  apostle :  "  Thou 
fool,  that  which  thou  sowest  is  not  quickened  except  it 
die.  *  Thou  sowest  not  that  body  which  shall  be.  * 
God  giveth  it  a  body  as  hath  pleased  him."    Observe  closely 


414 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


the  apostle's  statements.  The  seed  is  planted  and  dissolved 
but  lives  again,  not  as  a  seed  but  as  a  stalk,  or  plant.  It  lives 
again  in  an  entirely  new  form.  To  every  kind  of  life  is  given 
the  kind  of  body  needed ;  to  the  bird  a  body  suited  to  the  air ; 
to  the  fish  a  body  suited  to  the  water;  to  the  beasts  bodies 
suited  to  their  sphere  ;  to  the  stars  a  glory  that  is  their  own ;  to 
everything,  everywhere,  a  glory  and  a  form  suited  to  its  state. 

"  So  also  in  the  resurrection  of  the  dead."  On  earth  there 
was  a  body  adapted  to  earthly  condition.  At  death  that  earthly 
body  was  "  sown  "  or  planted  in  the  earth.  "  It  is  sown  in  cor- 
ruption," or  subject  to  corruption.  "  It  is  raised  in  incorrup- 
tion.  *  *  It  is  sown  a  natural  body  ;  it  is  raised  a  spiritual 
body."  Our  earthly  bodies,  like  that  of  the  earthly  Adam, 
are  of  earth  ;  the  new  body,  "  the  house  not  made  with  hands," 
is  in  the  image  of  the  heavenly  man,  the  glorified  body  of  Jesus 
Christ,  for  "  as  we  have  borne  the  image  of  the  earthly,  so  shall 
we  also  bear  the  image  of  the  heavenly."  Then,  to  silence  for- 
ever those  who  expect  a  sensual  heaven  in  which  they  shall 
abide  in  the  flesh  eternally,  he  exclaims,  "Now,  this  I  say, 
brethren,  that  Jiesli  and  hloocl  cannot  inherit  the  Jcingdom  of 
God;  neither  doth  corruption  inherit  incorruption."  This,  in 
its  connection,  can  only  have  one  meaning.  Flesh  and  blood 
bodies,  bodies  made  of  corruptible  earthly  materials,  are  not 
compatible  with  a  home  in  the  world  of  redeemed  and  glorified 
spirits.  The  soul's  tenement,  if  it  have  one,  must  be  adapted  to 
the  new  conditions  of  being. 

Are  we  then  denied  a  body  in  the  future  state?  By  no 
means.  I  may  not  be  able  to  understand  the  nature  of  that 
body,  because  I  have  never  seen  such  an  existence,  but  I  can 
accept  the  statements  of  the  word  of  God  and  believe  that  it  is 
exactly  fitted  to  the  happy  sphere  of  glorified  existence.  It  "  is 
a  building  of  God,"  it  is  made  "  as  it  hath  pleased  him,"  it 
is  "  a  spiritual  body,"  it  is  "  incorruptible,"  it  is  "  immortal," 
it  is  after  the  image  of  the  heavenly  man,  and  "  our  vile  bodies 
are  changed  into  the  likeness  of  his  glorified  body."    In  order 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


415 


to  comprehend  what  this  means  do  not  look  at  the  Lord  when  he 
was  here  in  the  form  of  a  servant,  but  look  at  him  as  seen  in 
glory  on  the  Mount  of  Transfiguration,  and  as  revealed  to  John 
on  Patmos,  shining  with  eternal  splendors.  What  material  of 
the  old  tabernacle  may  be  used  by  the  Lord  in  building  the  new 
form  is  unknown,  but  it  is  known  that  he  does  not  use  its  flesh 
and  blood.  Hence,  because  these  immortal  bodies  are  freed 
from  their  earthly  dross  and  from  all  the  ills  to  which  the  pres- 
ent dwelling  places  of  our  souls  are  incident,  there  can  never  be 
in  our  eternal  home  "  any  more  death,  neither  sorrow,  nor  cry- 
ing, neither  shall  there  be  any  more  pain  ;  for  the  former  things 
are  passed  away." 

HEAVEN. 

The  existence  of  sinless  man  began  in  Paradise ;  the  exist- 
ence of  man,  after  life's  journey  is  over,  if  he  has  chosen  his  lot 
with  the  children  of  God,  is  in  Paradise.  "  To  him  that  over- 
cometh,"  says  Christ,  "  I  will  give  to  eat  of  the  tree  of  life  which 
is  in  the  midst  of  the  Paradise  of  God."  Paul,  caught  up  into 
the  third  lieaven,  whether  in  the  body  or  out  of  it  he  could  not 
tell,  calls  it  Paradise.  The  paradise  of  the  infancy  of  our  race 
is  described  as  a  garden,  which  is,  indeed,  the  meaning  of  the 
term  itself;  the  future  home  of  the  redeemed  is  pictured  forth 
by  the  symbol  of  a  city ;  the  city  for  which  the  ancient  saints 
were  seeking  ;  a  city  which  hath  eternal  foundations ;  a  city  of 
which  God  is  the  builder.  The  earthly  Jerusalem  was  for  a 
thousand  years  the  center  of  the  worship  of  God's  people  on 
the  earth,  and  in  contrast  with  it  the  blessed  home  above  is 
styled  the  Heavenly,  and  the  New  Jerusalem. 

The  teachers  of  the  various  religions  which  have  been 
accepted  by  men  have  been  wont  to  describe  in  detail  the  future 
home  of  those  who  are  so  happy  as  to  gain  their  heaven.  The 
Greeks  portrayed  the  Elysiau  Fields  in  their  richest  strains  ; 
the  savage  Germans  and  Scandinavians  painted  eternal  ban- 
quets in  the  halls  of  Odin,  where  mighty  warriors  quaffed 


416 


CHRIST  AND  TEE  FUTLRE  LIFE. 


liquors  from  drinking  cups  made  of  the  skulls  of  slaughtered 
enemies.  The  Mohammedan  heaven  is  a  gigantic  harem  where 
the  followers  of  the  Prophet  are  surrounded  by  groups  of  beau- 
tiful Houris,  and  dwell  forever  among  green  trees,  shady  groves 
and  sparkling  fountains.  The  American  Indian  expected  to  go 
with  his  favorite  dog  and  gun  to  the  Happy  Hunting  grounds, 
where  he  would  find  abundance  of  game,  and  chase  it  forever. 
So  each  race  has  been  wont  to  paint  its  heaven  in  the  colors 
of  earth,  tinting  it  with  those  things  which  it  loved  best  in  the 
present  life.  On  the  other  hand,  the  Scriptures  are  content  to 
assure  us  of  a  heavenly  home,  a  home  prepared  by  the  Savior, 
a  blessed  abode  which  trouble  and  pain  can  never  enter,  a  home 
provided  by  the  love  of  a  Heavenly  Father,  and  for  some  reason 
have  failed  to  give  us  detailed  descriptions.  It  is  true  that  our 
poets  have  transferred  into  their  songs  the  things  that  enter 
into  their  conceptions  of  a  beautiful  home,  and  we  sing  in  our 
songs  of  "  the  green  fields  of  Eden,"  "  the  fields  that  are  eter- 
nally fair,"  "  the  glittering  strand,"  "  its  gardens  and  pleasant 
greens,"  etc.,  but  these  pretty  thoughts  have  been  drawn  from 
the  imagination  of  the  poets  rather  than  from  the  word  of  God. 

The  paucity  of  details  is  due,  I  suppose,  not  to  the  unwilling- 
ness of  our  Heavenly  Father  to  inform  us,  but  to  the  limitations 
of  our  understanding.  We  can  only  understand  what  we  have 
not  seen  by  comparison.  "When  we  read  or  hear  of  a  country 
we  have  not  seen,  a  picture  is  impressed  upon  our  minds  by  the 
words,  and  that  picture  is  made  of  ideas  drawn  from  things  we 
have  seen.  Its  mountains,  lakes,  rivers,  animals,  vegetation 
are  all  represented  by  images  drawn  from  things  within  the 
bounds  of  our  experience.  The  more  enlarged  our  experience 
is,  the  better  we  can  understand.  Some  things  the  child  cannot 
understand,  which  will  be  clear  to  it  when  it  becomes  a 
man.  Some  things  the  savage  cannot  comprehend  which  are 
clear  to  the  enlightened.  Our  state  in  heaven,  heaven  itself, 
our  life,  employments  and  enjoyments  there,  dilfer  entirely  from 
life  and  enjoyments  in  the  flesh,  and  since  there  is  nothing 


CHRI8T  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


417 


within  our  present  knowledge  that  we  can  make  a  standard  of 
comparison,  it  is  impossible  for  us  to  have  clear  and  correct  con- 
ceptions. If  we  now  picture  heaven,  that  picture  is  made  up  of 
earthly  scenery,  tinted  in  earthly  colors. 

Yet  there  are  certain  general  features  we  can  understand. 
Some  persons  have  turned  to  the  Book  of  Revelation  and  hung 
over  its  sublime  imagery,  as  if  these  were  literal  descriptions  of 
our  eternal  home  ;  but  we  must  remember  that  this  is  a  book  of 
symbols,  and  that  this  fact  will  not  permit  a  strict  adherence  to 
the  letter  in  seeking  the  meaning  of  its  glowing  visions.  Reve- 
lation does  not  aim  to  teach,  us,  as  some  have  thought,  that  the 
ceaseless  emi^loyment  of  heaven  is  eternal  singing  or  praising, 
but  that  it  is  an  abode  of  rapturous  joy  of  which  song  and 
praise  are  the  natural  expressions.  Nor  are  we  to  conclude  that 
the  heavenly  city  is  literally  paved  with  gold  and  fenced  in  with 
jasper  walls  and  pearly  gates,  but  that  it  is  a  splendid  and 
glorious  home  beyond  anything  that  mortal  eye  has  ever  seen. 
The  seer  of  Patmos  sees  sweeping  before  the  eyes  of  his  soul 
visions  of  unearthly  beauty  though  drawn  in  earthly  colors, 
and  blessed  is  he  that  reads  and  understands  their  real  signifi- 
cation. In  addition  to  these  apparent  descriptions,  we  rejoice 
in  the  thought  that  our  own  Lord  and  Savior  arose  from  earth, 
ascended  to  heaven,  and  assured  us  that  he  was  going  in  order 
to  prepare  a  place  for  u^  in  the  Father's  House.  That  place 
will  be  prepared  by  the  hands  of  Love,  and  those  hands  are 
Omnipotent.  We  are  therefore  assured  that  it  will  lack  no 
beauty,  no  comfort,  no  blessing,  no  good  thing  that  God's  great 
universe  can  supply. 

With  a  few  condensed  thoughts  which  might  be  expanded 
into  a  volume,  I  must  bring  this  article  to  a  close.  The  first  is, 
that  no  place  can  be  heaven  to  any  being  loho  does  not  take 
heaven  to  it  in  his  soul.  Heaven  is  a  state,  as  well  as  a  place. 
No  man  can  be  happy  unless  he  has  the  elements  of  happiness 
within.  Some  carry  hell  with  them  wherever  they  go.  Heaven 
was  a  hell  to  Milton's  Satan  ;  lieaven  would  be  hell  to  the  sinner 

27 


418 


CHRIST  AXn  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


Steeped  in  sin,  hating  God  and  righteousness.  In  order  to  have 
an  eternal  heaven,  we  must  have  the  love  of  heaven,  of  God  and 
heavenly  things,  planted  in  our  souls  while  below. 

In  the  Second  place,  we  gain  some  idea  of  the  bliss  of  heaven 
by  the  eternal  absence  of  the  things  that  distress  ns  here. 
These  frail  bodies  of  ours  are  often  bundles  of  pain  so  severe 
that  we  sigh  for  release.  There  are  those  who  are  upon  the 
rack  day  and  night,  and  life  is  a  long-drawn  agony.  How  sweet 
the  thought  to  these  tired  and  weary  ones ;  to  all  whose  bodies 
are  aching,  whether  it  be  from  the  burdens  of  toil  or  disease,  to 
think  of  a  home  near  at  hand,  where  there  is  no  pain  any  more, 
where  strong  crying  and  tears  are  unheard  and  unseen  forever ! 
These  aching  bodies  of  flesh  and  blood  and  nerve  shall  be 
exchanged  for  spiritual,  incorruj)tible,  undying  bodies  which 
will  never  get  out  of  repair,  and  hence  will  never  suffer  pain. 
And  this  fact  also  excludes  another  of  the  dark  shadows  which 
clouds  our  earthly  life.  With  such  bodies  there  will  be  no 
death  in  the  eternal  home,  no  funerals,  no  broken  circles,  no 
bereaved  hearts,  no  mourners,  none  of  that  great  sorrow  that 
Cometh  sooner  or  later  to  every  earthly  household,  and  the  dread 
of  whose  coming  always  casts  a  gloom. 

Then,  again,  the  curse  of  this  present  world  is  sin.  Sin 
unsheathes  the  sword,  devastates  a  country  with  Avar,  burns 
cities,  turns  brutal  soldiery  upon  wives  and  daughters,  opens 
the  saloon,  the  gambling  den,  and  the  brothel,  beggars  millions 
of  our  race,  poisons  with  slander,  cheats,  robs,  murders,  and 
indeed  perpetuates  every  wrong  that  fills  the  world  with  wretch- 
edness. Who  hath  not  felt  its  bitter  sting!  Who  hath  not 
known  the  sorrow  of  unmerited  wrong !  Who  hath  not  traced 
his  greatest  misery  to  the  jjresence  of  sin  in  this  world !  In  view 
of  this  sad  experience  of  our  race  there  is  no  statement  concern- 
ing the  heavenly  city  which  contains  sweeter  comfort  than  the 
assurance  that  "  there  shall  no  sin  enter  there."  "  There  shall  in 
no  wise  enter  into  it  anything  that  denleth,  neither  whatsoever 
worketh  abomination  or  maketh  a  lie,  but  they  which  are 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


419 


written  in  the  Lamb's  book  of  life."  Not  in  the  holy  city,  but 
"without,  are  dogs,  and  sorcerers,  and  whoremongers,  and  mur- 
derers and  idolaters,  and  whosoever  loveth  and  maketh  a  lie." 
Never  in  that  blessed  abode  shall  the  righteous  soul  be  grieved 
by  the  sight  of  impurity  or  wrong;  never  shall  the  saint  endure 
the  sting  of  an  angry,  spiteful  or  slanderous  tongue.  There 
shall  no  shadow  fall  upon  the  spirit,  no  penalty  for  broken  law, 
nor  shall  there  "be  any  more  curse,"  because  the  defiling  touch 
of  sin  shall  never  stain  that  pure  and  holy  home  of  the 
redeemed.  There  will  be  no  discord  in  heaven,  but  union  and 
peace  forevermore. 

I  shall  not  draw  upon  my  imagination  for  the  employments 
of  the  happy  dwellers.  They  will  not  be  idle,  nor  will  their 
employments  be  useless.  They  have  on  earth  worked  the  Avoik 
of  God,  and  they  will  work  it  still ;  their  earthly  life  has  been 
a  continual  growth  in  divine  knowledge,  and  heaven  will  not 
bring  that  growth  to  its  end.  If  there  be  work  forever  for  the 
angels,  surely  there  will  be  work  for  God's  redeemed  children. 
But  one  of  the  most  delightful  prospects  of  heaven  is  the 
blessed  company  that  shall  gather  in  the  hol}^,  happy  land. 
Socrates,  in  the  Phaedo,  is  made  to  speak  of  the  worthies 
beyond,  whom  he  expects  to  see  when  he  passes  through  the 
gates  of  which  the  hemlock  was  to  be  the  key.  And  what  a 
holy  and  happy  reunion  will  be  ours  on  the  celestial  shores ! 
Not  only  will  we  be  greeted  by  our  own  sainted  dead,  the  loved 
ones  whom  regretful  memory  still  keeps  near  us,  but  also  by 
the  grand  heroes  of  whom  the  world  was  not  worthy,  who  have 
laid  themselves  upon  the  altar  of  humanity.  In  that  heavenly 
society  we  will  meet  Judson,  and  Luther,  and  Savonarola,  and 
the  mighty  host  of  sufferers,  male  and  female,  who  loved  not 
their  own  lives  ;  the  ever  glorious  Paul,  and  the  other  members 
of  that  immortal  band  of  apostles,  evangelists  and  martyrs  who 
put  in  motion  the  new  forces  that  changed  the  world ;  the  sweet 
and  blessed  women  wlio  told  the  first  news  of  the  Risen  Lord ; 
and  there,  too,  will  "gather  many  from  the  east  and  the  west 


420 


CHRIST  AND  THE  FUTURE  LIFE. 


who  will  sit  down  in  the  kingdom  with  Abraham,  and  Isaac  and 
Jacob,"  and  the  rest  of  the  men  of  God  of  the  infant  world. 

"  There  the  saints  of  all  ages  in  harmony  meet, 
Their  Savior  and  brethren  transported  to  greet; 
While  the  anthems  of  rapture  unceasingly  roll, 
And  the  smile  of  the  Lord  is  the  feast  of  the  soul." 

When  the  day  comes  for  the  parting  of  the  nations  of  men, 
will  it  be  found  that  your  name,  dear  reader,  is  recorded  in  the 
Book  of  Life? 


James  Hauvev  Garrison  was  born  on  the  2(1  day  of  February,  1842,  near 
Ozark,  in  what  was  tlion  Greene  (now  Christian)  county,  JMo.  His  maternal 
grandfather,  Robert  Kyle,  was  an  Irishman,  wlio  mi<rratcd  to  tliis  country  soon 
after  the  revolution,  and  lorated  in  Virginia.  He  was  a  soldier  in  the  war  of 
1812,  and  died  of  sickness  contracted  in  the  army.  His  paternal  grandfalher, 
Isaac  Garrison,  was  a  Jsorth  Carolinian,  who  migrated  to  East  Tennessee  alxmt 
the  beginning  of  the  present  century.  His  parents,  James  and  Dianna  (Kyle) 
Garrison,  moved  friim  Hawkins  county.  East  Tennessee,  about  the  year  1835,  and 
located  in  Southwest  jMissouri  at  the  place  above  mentioned.  In  his  early  yuuth 
he  attended  schotd  at  Ozark,  and  became  an  ex|)ert  in  reading  and  spelling  at  a 
very  early  age.  When  eleven  years  of  atre,  his  jiarents  moved  to  a  new  and  then 
unsettled  part  of  the  county,  near  where  Billings  is  now  located.  Here  school 
advantages  were  scant,  and  hard  work  in  opening  a  new  farm  took  the  place  of 
study  for  a  few  years.  At  the  age  of  fifteen  he  made  a  public  profession  of 
r-digion  and  united  with  the  Baptist  Church,  of  whicli  his  parents  and  grand- 
parents before  him  were  members,  and  began  to  take  an  active  part  in  religious 
meetings.  About  this  time  a  Yankee  school  teacher,  C.  P.  Hall,  came  into  the 
neighborhood,  and  tauirht  an  excellent  school  for  several  terms,  of  which  the 
suliject  of  this  sketch  was  a  constant  member,  missing  only  a  part  of  one  term  to 
teach  a  <listrict  Sfho(jl  when  he  was  sixteen  years  of  age.  The  outbreak  of  the 
war  found  him  a^'ain  at  Ozark  attending  a  high  school,  tautrht  by  the  Yankee 
teacher  referred  to  aliove.  The  excitement  following  the  firing  of  Sumter  caused 
tlie  discontinuance  of  the  scho(d,  and  he  identified  himself  with  a  company  of 
Home  Guards  whose  rendezvous  was  Springfield.  After  the  battle  of  "Wilson's 
Creek,  he  enlisted  in  the  24th  ;Mo.  Inft.  V(jl.,  was  soon  promoted  to  the  rank  of 
1st  Sergeant,  and  was  woinuled  quite  si'verely  on  the  evening  of  the  secoud  day  of 
the  battle  of  I'ea  KiJue,  in  March,  lSti2.  He  raised  a  com])aiiy  for  the  8th  Mo. 
Cav.  Vols.,  as  soon  as  he  was  able  for  active  duty,  and  was  commissioned  as 
Captain  Sept.  ]•>,  181)2.  He  continued  his  services  in  the  Union  Army  until  the 
close  of  the  A\ar,  particiiiating  in  several  battles,  acting  as  Assistant  Inspector 
General  of  his  brigade  for  more  than  a  year,  and  being  promoted  to  the  rank 
of  jMajor,  for  meritorious  service,  during  tlie  last  year  of  the  war. 

When  mustered  out  of  the  army  in  St.  Louis,  in  lS(j5,  he  entered  Abingdon 
College,  in  Abing<lon,  111.,  and  gra<lnated  in  ISiiS^  as  Bachelor  of  Arts.  One 
week  after  his  graduation  he  was  married  to  Miss  Judith  E.  Garrett,  of  Camp 
Point,  III.,  w!)o  graduateil  in  the  same  class  with  him,  and  who  has  been  to 
him  all  that  a  faithful  and  affectionate  wife  can  be  to  her  husband.  He  entered 
college  with  the  purpose  of  devoting  himself  to  the  law,  but  during  his  college 
course  he  had  surrendereil  his  denominational  name  and  allegiance  and  had 
identified  himself  with  the  Reformation,  a  fact  whicli  chantred  all  his  plans.  He 
at  once  began  preaching,  an<l  in  the  autumn  of  18(18  located  with  the  church  at 
Macomb,  111.,  to  share  its  pulpit  with  J.  C.  Ri-ynolds,  who  was  publisliing  and 
editing  the  Gospel  Echo  at  that  place.  A  partiiciHliij)  Mas  formed  with  Bro. 
Reynolds,  beginning  Jan.  1,  18()0,  by  which  he  hci  amo  (jue  of  the  editors  and 
puhlishers  of  that  magazine.  This  was  tlie  beginning  of  his  editorial  career, 
wiiicli  continues  to  the  jnesent.  In  1871,  Tlie  CliriMimi,  of  Kansas  City,  Mo.,  was 
consolidated  with  the  Erlm,  and  Mr.  (iarrison  removed  to  Quiney,  111.,  where  he 
published  the  consolidated  jiai)er  under  the  title  of  Goapel  Eclio  and  Christian  at 
first,  and  later  as  T/ie  CIinsti<ui.  In  the  year  1873  a  joint  stock  company  was 
organized  and  incorporated  as  the  "Christian  Puldishing  Comiiany,"  and  The 
Christian  was  moved  to  St.  Louis,  and  was  issued  from  that  city  from  Jan.  1,  1874, 
under  the  auspices  of  the  publishing  company,  with  J.  11.  (iai  rison  as  editor-in- 
ciiief.  He  has  resided  in  St.  Louis  ever  since,  except  nearly  two  years  spent  in 
England,  when  he  was  pastor  of  the  church  at  Soutiiport  in  bs,sl"and  1882,  and 
almost  two  years  spent  in  cliarire  of  the  work  in  Boston  in  188.5  and  1886.  His 
connection  with  the  Christian-ErinnjcUst,  however,  has  never  ceased.  His  tem- 
porary absences  from  the  office  were  the  result  of  ill-health,  brought  on  by  too 
close  confinement  to  office  work.  He  is  also  the  author  of  "  Heavenward  Way," 
publislied  in  18S0,  "Alone  with  God,"  published  the  current  year,  and  several 
smaller  works,  which  have  had  a  wide  circulation. 


J.  H.  GAKKISON. 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE  ;    OR,  HELPS 
AND  HINDRANCES. 


J.  H.  GARRISON. 
PBELIMINABT. 

If  history  be  but  philosophy  teaching  by  example,  as  has 
been  said,  then  the  experience  of  those  associated  with  any 
great  movement  in  human  thought  ought  to  contain  instructive 
lessons  for  those  interested  in  such  movement.  The  nation  or 
people,  civil  or  religious,  that  refuses  to  learn  from  its  own  his- 
tory, is  already  foredoomed.  Closing  its  eyes  to  the  Past,  it 
finds  itself  out  of  sympathy  with  the  Present,  and  therefore 
with  no  promise  of  the  Future. 

The  question  has  sometimes  been  asked  concerning  us  by 
others,  and  sometimes  by  ourselves,  as  to  whether  we  have 
changed  any  in  our  teaching. and  practice  within  the  brief  lim- 
its of  our  history  as  a  religions  movement.  The  usual  reply  to 
such  an  interrogation  has  been  that  any  seeming  change  on  our 
part  is  occasioned  by  the  distinct  advance  toward  the  truth 
made  by  others,  and  by  the  diminution  of  prejudice  which  for- 
merly prevented  them  from  understanding  our  real  position. 
And,  no  doubt,  there  is  much  truth  in  this  statement  of  the 
case.  But  to  affirm  that  we  have  had  no  part  in  the  wonderful 
religious  progress  of  the  past  half  century,  that  we  have  re- 
mained stationary  amid  the  advancing  hosts,  would  be  to 
accuse  ourselves  of  intellectual  stagnation,  and  incapacity  to 
profit  either  by  the  lessons  of  our  own  experience,  or  by  the 
ever-increasing  sum-total  of  human  knowledge.  The  proud 
boast  of  the  church  of  Rome  that  she  is  always  the  same 
{semper  eadem)  is  based  on  her  claim  to  infallibility,  but  as  we 
make  no  such  absurd  claim  either  for  ourselves  or  for  the 

(421) 


422 


LESSONS  FROM  OCR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


fathers  of  tlie  Reformation,  neither  can  we  consistently 
adopt  its  vain  boast,  semper  eadem,  as  our  motto.  Such  a 
boast  on  our  part  would  ill  comport  with  our  claims  as  reform- 
ers, seeking  to  restore,  in  its  purity  and  power,  that  gospel 
which  makes  perfection  the  goal  of  Christian  hope,  and  is  the 
mainspring  of  human  progress.  Neither  would  such  a  claim 
harmonize  with  that  name  by  which,  more  than  any  other,  we 
are  designated.  Disciples  of  Christ,  signifying  learners  at  the 
feet  of  Christ.  Being  human  we  have  often  erred  ;  being  falli- 
ble we  have  committed  many  mistakes;  being  men  of  "like  pas- 
sions" with  others,  we  have  not  always  been  free  from  party 
spirit,  or  from  the  tendency  to  extreme  views  on  questions  in 
discussion. 

But  does  this  frank  admission,  which  candor  compels,  invali- 
date, in  the  least,  the  truth,  value,  or  providential  character  of 
our  reformatory  movement  ?  No  more  than  the  acknowledged 
errors  and  divisions  in  Christendom  invalidate  the  claims  of 
Christianity  as  a  divine  and  perfect  religion.  Whatever  mis- 
takes may  have  been  made,  in  the  historical  development  of  our 
reformatory  movement,  we  maintain  that  there  was  no  mistake 
in  its  aim  and  its  great  underlying  principles.  That  divisions 
among  God's  people,  hindering  their  mutual  fellowship  and  co- 
operation, are  wrong,  and  should  be  healed ;  that  these  divi- 
sions have  resulted  from  the  corruption  of  the  pure  Christianity 
of  the  New  Testament,  and  that  unity  among  Christians  can 
only  be  secured  by  freeing  Christianity  from  such  corruption  ^ 
and  restoring  it  in  its  faith,  its  doctrine,  its  ordinances  and  its 
life,  are  propositions  that  have  stood  the  test  of  the  fiercest  crit- 
icism of  the  past,  and  stand  acknowledged  to-day  by  the  ablest 
minds  of  Christendom.  In  undertaking,  therefore,  to  promote 
Christian  unity,  and  to  hasten  the  fulfillment  of  Christ's  prayer, 
through  the  restoration  of  the  gospel  in  its  original  simplicity, 
our  fathers  made  no  mistake.  Indeed,  it  is  not  yet  seen  how 
they  could  have  been  loyal  to  Christ  and  to  their  convictions  of 
truth,  without  undertaking  such  an  effort. 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


423 


In  carrying  out  this  lofty  aim,  they  adopted,  as  a  working 
principle,  the  rule  that  whatever  was  without  divine  sanction  or 
authority,  had  no  legitimate  place  in  the  faith  or  practice  of 
the  church,  and  was  not  to  be  imposed  on  men's  consciences  by 
human  authority ;  and  whatever  has  such  divine  warrant  is  not 
to  be  omitted  from  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  church.  This 
principle  assumed  the  form  of  the  now  famous  motto  :  "Where 
the  Scriptures  speak  we  speak,  and  where  the  Scriptures  are 
silent  we  are  silent."  That  is,  they  agreed  to  be  bound  where 
God's  word  binds  men,  but  refused  to  be  bound  or  to  bind  oth- 
ers, with  human  fetters,  where  God's  word  leaves  them  free. 

In  this  aim,  and  in  these  principles,  they  clearly  made  no 
mistake.  It  was  but  carrying  out  to  its  legitimate  results  the 
Protestant  battle-cry  of  the  16  th  century  :  "  The  Bible  and  the 
Bible  alone  is  the  religion  of  Protestants."  The  time  was  ripe 
for  such  a  movement.  The  world  needed  it,  a  growing  sense  of 
the  evil  of  a  divided  church  demanded  it.  God's  providence 
had  023ened  up  the  way  and  raised  up  the  men  for  it  and  it 
must  needs  be.  Even  Gibbon,  in  his  "  Decline  and  Fall  of  the 
Roman  Empire,"  recognized  the  distinction  between  Christian- 
ity as  it  came  from  Christ  and  a  modern,  corrupt  Christianity. 
He  says  :  "  The  theologian  may  indulge  in  the  pleasant  task  of 
describing  Religion  as  she  descended  from  heaven,  arrayed  in 
her  native  purity.  A  more  melancholy  duty  is  imposed  upon 
the  historian.  He  must  discover  the  irfevitable  mixture  of  error 
and  corruption  which  she  contracted  in  a  long  residence  upon 
earth,  among  a  weak  and  degenerate  race  of  beings."  It  is  the 
duty  of  reformers,  not  only  to  "  discover  the  inevitable  mixture 
of  error  and  corruption  "  by  which  Christianity  has  been  de- 
nied, but  to  seek  to  purify  this  divine  religion  from  such  mix- 
ture. In  bending  their  energies  to  this  most  difficult  task,  our 
fathers  certainly  made  no  mistake.  This  leaves,  therefore,  our 
reformatory  plea,  as  to  its  essential  principles,  in  all  its  integ- 
rity and  commanding  importance,  and  with  all  its  binding  obli- 
gations upon  us. 


424 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


But  to  expect  that  these  principles,  so  manifestly  true,  could 
be  applied  to  all  the  difficult  problems  of  modern  times  with- 
out any  mistake,  would  be  to  expect  an  impossibility.  We 
may  indeed  claim  as  much  exemption  from  erroneous  and  hurt- 
ful tendencies  as  often  falls  to  the  lot  of  mortals,  but  they 
themselves — the  leaders  in  this  movement,  and  those  who  suc- 
ceeded them — would  be  the  last  to  claim  infallibility  for  their 
work.  Experience  is  a  teacher  from  whose  school  none  are 
exempt,  and  there  are  some  lessons  which  have  to  be  learned 
in  that  school,  and  in  no  other.  The  Great  Teacher  himself 
chooses  to  teach  his  followers  wisdom  in  practical  matters  in 
this  school. 

It  must  be  our  task  now,  ungracious  as  it  may  appear  to 
some,  to  point  out  some  of  the  more  important  lessons  taught 
us  in  our  experience  of  three  quarters  of  a  century.  Our 
motive  in  so  doing  is  to  impress  these  lessons  more  fully  and 
more  generally  upon  the  minds  of  the  brotherhood,  that  those 
who  come  after  us  may  profit  thereby.  Great  as  our  success 
has  been  in  clarifying  the  religious  atmosphere  on  many  ques- 
tions, in  winning  men  to  the  acknowledgment  of  Christ,  in 
organizing  churches,  building  up  schools,  producing  a  litera- 
ture and  in  making  our  influence  felt  in  the  world,  no  one  can 
doubt,  that,  unhampered  by  the  fetters  of  error  or  partial  truth 
which  have  hindered  us,  we  could  have  accomplished  a  much 
grander  work  for  God  than  that  which  we  have  wrought. 
While  we  could  not  reasonably  have  expected  freedom  from  all 
mistakes  in  the  past,  it  is  certainly  not  unreasonable  to  expect 
that  having  grown  older  and  wiser,  we  shall  correct  the  errors 
of  the  past  and  make  them  stepping  stones  to  larger  success  in 
the  future.  To  do  this,  however,  requires  a  higher  order  of 
oourage  than  that  which  has  hitherto  prompted  us  to  defend 
our  position  against  all  attacks  from  without.  As  it  is  greater 
to  rule  one's  spirit  than  to  conquer  a  city,  so  it  is  greater  and 
more  difficult  to  acknowledge  and  correct  our  mistakes  than  to 
defend  the  truth  we  hold  against  the  assaults  of  the  enemy. 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


425 


NEW  WINE  IN  OLD  BOTTLES. 

It  was  not  the  original  purpose  of  those  who  inaugurated 
the  movement  for  the  unity  of  Christians  by  the  restoration 
of  primitive  or  New  Testament  Christianity,  to  form  a  sepa- 
rate or  distinct  religious  community.  They  recognized  the 
evils  of  division,  deprecated  the  party  spirit  that  was  every- 
where so  prevalent,  saw  the  superstition  that  had  been  en- 
grafted upon  the  religion  of  Christ  and  conceived  the  only 
remedy  for  this  disordered  state  of  things  to  be  the  repudiation 
of  all  human  creeds,  as  bonds  of  union,  and  of  all  party  names 
as  religious  designations,  and  to  make  the  word  of  God  alone 
their  rule  of  faith  and  practice.  So  conceiving,  they  formed  an 
association  for  the  purpose  of  promoting  these  principles.  It 
was  not  intended  or  foreseen  that  membership  in  this  associa- 
tion should  or  would  interfere  with  membership  in  any  of  the 
evangelical  churches.  They  felt  that  the  reasonableness  and 
manifestly  scriptural  character  of  their  plea  would  commend  it 
to  the  pious,  truth-loving  members  in  all  churches,  and  that  the 
gradual  adoption  of  its  cardinal  principles  would  eventually 
work  a  peaceful  revolution  in  the  religious  world,  resulting  in  a 
united  church,  a  restored  Christianity,  with  its  old  time  zeal 
and  conquering  power,  and,  soon,  a  converted  world.  Who  can 
deny  that  this  was  a  magnificent  dream,  or  feel  surprised  that 
those  who  were  enamored  of  its  glory,  saw  in  the  enthusiasm  of 
its  first  visible  triumph,  the  foregleaming  of  a  brighter  day — a 
true  millennial  harbinger  ?  And  so  the  first  lesson  to  be  learned 
by  the  heroic  men  who  unfurled  to  the  breeze  this  banner  of  re- 
form was  the  old  lesson  taught  by  Christ  eighteen  centuries  be- 
fore, namely :  the  impossibility  of  preserving  new  wine  in  old 
bottles. 

The  idea  of  advocating  these  new  and  revolutionary  princi- 
ples within  the  old  denominational  lines  was  soon  found  to  be 
impracticable.  The  old  parties  were  too  narrow,  too  proscrip- 
tive,  too  zealous  of  their  party  names  and  peculiar  dogmas  to 


■i-26 


LESSONS  FBOM  OUR  PAST  EXPEEIENCE. 


tolerate  within  their  communion  men  whose  avowed  principles 
looked  toward  the  demolition  of  party  walls  and  the  reconstruc- 
tion of  the  religious  life  of  Christendom  on  the  lines  of  the 
apostolic  church.  Nor  is  it  to  be  wondered  at  that  this  was  so. 
When  was  it  ever  found  to  be  different  in  the  history  of  any  re- 
ligious movement  ?  Did  Christ  find  the  religious  leaders  of  his 
time  ready  to  accept  his  plan  for  founding  a  spiritual  kingdom  ? 
Did  Luther  meet  with  the  co-operation  of  the  hierarchy  of  the 
Romish  church,  when  he  sought  to  purify  its  faith  and  teaching, 
or  did  he  even  meet  with  toleration  within  the  bosom  of  the 
church  while  seeking  to  correct  its  abuses  ?  "When  John  Wes- 
ley undertook  to  revitalize  the  cold  formalism  of  the  Church  of 
England  and  to  foster  the  true  piety  and  scriptural  holiness 
"throughout  these  islands,"  did  he  meet  with  aid,  encouragement 
or  even  religious  toleration  from  the  priesthood  of  the  Estab- 
lished Church  ?  In  all  these  instances  the  new  wine  of  the  re- 
formers was  found  to  be  too  expansive  and  effervescent  for  the 
inflexible  and  non-expansive  bottles  of  the  then  existing  re- 
ligious institutions,  traditions  and  usages.  Christ  never  ex- 
pected the  legislation  of  Moses,  or  the  forms  of  Judaism,  to 
contain  the  free,  expanding  life  of  his  religion,  but  nothing  is 
more  natural  than  that  Luther,  Wesley  and  Campbell  should 
aim,  at  first,  to  accomplish  the  reformations  they  respectively 
sought  to  realize,  within  the  limits  and  fellowship  of  the 
churches  with  which  they  have  been  identified.  They  could  not 
be  expected  to  foresee  the  results  of  the  movements  tln-y  in- 
augurated as  Christ  foresaw  the  outcome  of  the  principles  and 
truths  which  he  taught,  and  of  the  gospel  which  he  commis- 
sioned his  apostles  to  preach  among  all  nations. 

The  mistake  in  the  case  of  all  these  reformers  was  not  in  con- 
ceiving it  to  be  a  very  desirable  thing  to  accomplish  their  re- 
forms without  a  new  and  distinct  organization  exercising  eccle- 
siastical functions,  but  in  supposing  that  such  a  thing  was 
practicable  in  the  then  existing  condition  of  things.  It  is  not 
difficult  to  see  many  advantages  in  the  method  of  procedure 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  FAST  EXPERIENCE. 


427 


tliey  marked  out,  if  only  it  had  been  permitted  to  proceed. 
The  inaccessibility  of  the  very  persons  who  most  need  the 
light,  which  inevitably  results  from  separate  organization, 
might  in  that  case  have  been  largely  avoided.  The  liability  of 
being  misunderstood,  both  as  to  aim  and  principles,  would  have 
been  much  lessened  in  that  event,  and  the  antagonism  would 
not  have  been  so  sharp  and  bitter.  Moreover,  all  the  expense 
and  machinery  involved  in  a  separate  religious  movement 
might  have  been  avoided  could  the  reformation  have  been  al- 
lowed to  work  out  its  results  under  the  protection  of  charity 
and  religious  tolerance.  But,  for  reasons  stated,  this  could  not 
be.  In  spite  of  all  the  protestations  against  such  an  intention, 
the  men  who  began  the  advocacy  of  the  principles  we  yet  hold 
dear,  soon  found  themselves  religiously  ostracised  and  com- 
pelled  to  assume  a  distinct  position  among  the  religious  forces 
of  the  age,  or  abandon  a  cause  they  felt  sure  to  be  from  heaven. 
Every  great  reformation  founded  on  vital  principles  demands 
freedom  of  utterance  and  of  action  in  order  to  accomplish  its 
aim.  Such  freedom  our  fathers  did  not  find  within  the  denom- 
inational walls,  then  so  high  and  so  jealously  guarded.  They 
must  come  out  or  religiously  perish.    They  came  out. 

Experience,  then,  has  taught  us  this  lesson.  There  is  no 
room  even  now,  much  less  then,  in  any  denomination  in  Chris- 
tendom, for  the  man  whose  deep  conviction  is  that  denomina- 
tionalism  is  wrong,  is  an  abnormal  state  of  the  church,  is  con- 
trary to  Christ's  prayer  for  the  unity  of  his  disciples  and  is  an 
insuperable  obstacle  in  the  way  of  the  conversion  of  the  world. 
As  soon  as  men  come  to  possess  this  conviction,  or  rather  when 
such  a  conviction  comes  to  possess  men,  they  must,  for  the 
present  at  least,  seek  a  broader  basis  than  that  afforded  by  any 
sect  of  Christendom,  if  they  would  breathe  the  air  of  religious 
freedom  and  find  scope  for  activities  along  the  lines  of  their 
conviction. 

The  lesson  we  have  pointed  out  has  a  wider  bearing  than  the 
religious  world.    The  principle  applies  to  the  whole  field  of 


428 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


social  reform,  and  is  specially  pertinent,  just  now,  to  the  con- 
dition of  things  in  our  national  politics.  It  lies  just  outside 
the  limits  of  our  present  discussion,  but  we  trespass  far  enough 
to  venture  the  prediction  that  not  many  years  hence,  the  real 
friends  of  prohibition — those  who  believe  the  liquor  traffic  to 
be  the  supreme  social  evil  of  our  time — will  be  compelled  to  act 
together,  regardless  of  former  party  affiliations,  in  an  organiza- 
tion pledged  to  the  prohibition  cause,  because  there  will  be  no 
room,  for  them  within  the  old  party  lines. 

PERILS  OF  A  SEPARATE  EXISTENCE. 

"We  have  pointed  out  the  impracticability  of  carrying  on  our 
reformatory  work  within  existing  denominational  lines,  and  the 
necessity  which  came  upon  us,  as  it  had  upon  other  reformers, 
of  assuming  a  separate  position  among  the  religious  bodies  of 
Christendom.  But  let  no  one  suppose  that  such  a  course 
involved  no  subtle  dangers,  no  temptation  to  repeat  the  very 
mistakes  we  were  seeking  to  amend. 

In  the  first  place  there  was  the  danger  of  being  misunder- 
stood. How  could  the  world  be  expected  to  see  in  this  new 
religious  organization  anytliing  more  than  another  one  of  the 
numerous  sects  of  Christendom  ?  True,  a  candid  and  careful 
examination  of  the  motives,  principles  and  aims  of  the  move- 
ment would  have  disclosed  fundamental  differences,  but  the 
world  is  not  given  to  such  examinations.  Practically,  tlierefore, 
we  were  under  the  disadvantage  of  being  misunderstood  in  the 
most  vital  part  of  our  plea.  Being,  primarily,  a  movement  for 
union,  it  seemed  to  be,  on  the  surface,  a  divisive  movement,  and 
was  so  regarded  by  superficial  observers.  That  an  effort  to 
realize  Christian  union  should  begin  in  separation,  is  not  more 
strange  than  that  the  King  of  Peace,  in  establishing  a  kingdom 
of  peace,  should  send  a  sword,  and  strife  into  the  world.  But 
the  world  has  never  understood  either  the  one  or  the  other. 

But  this  was  a  danger  from  without  and  one  for  which. 


LESSONS  FROM  OUJi  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


429 


within  certain  nmits,  we  were  not  responsible.  A  more  subtle 
danger  came  from  within.  Having  the  outward  form  and  sem- 
blance of  another  religious  party  contending  for  certain  peculi- 
arities, how  easy  it  was,  all  unconsciously,  to  foster  party  spirit, 
party  pride,  and  to  glory  in  party  more  than  in  the  cross !  IIow 
great  the  temptation  to  magnify  our  virtues,  our  work,  and  our 
success,  and  to  minify  those  of  others!  This  virus  of  party 
spirit  is  so  subtle  that  it  steals  into  many  hearts  unawares  and 
is  not  unfrequently  extolled  as  a  virtue,  such  as  zeal  for  the 
truth  or  extraordinary  soundness  in  the  faith.  Closely  allied 
thereto,  is  a  species  of  narrowness  and  bigotry  which  identifies 
its  own  limits  with  those  of  the  kingdom  of  God !  To  what 
extent  this  perversion  of  an  anti-sectarian  movement  has  pre- 
vailed, is  not  easy  to  say.  That  we  have  all  seen  some  mani- 
festations of  its  existence,  however,  is  certain.  That  it  exerts 
no  controlling  influence  among  us,  and  that  to  whatever  degree 
it  may  have  prevailed  it  is  now  a  diminishing  and  vanishing 
force  are  the  important  and  consoling  facts  in  the  case.  It  must, 
nevertheless,  be  reckoned  among  the  hindrances  which  have 
retarded  the  progress  of  a  movement  which  holds  the  inde- 
structible and  victorious  principles  of  religious  reform. 

That  we  may  identify  this  lurking  spirit  of  sectarianism, 
and  exorcise  it,  let  us  consider  a  few  of  its  marks  : 

1.  It  is  incapable  of  appreciating  and  rejoicing  over  all  the 
good  that  is  being  done  in  the  M^orld  outside  the  religious  body 
with  which  it  claims  identification.  Although  heathendom  may 
be  receiving  the  light  of  Christ's  gospel,  and  souls  steeped  in 
idolatry  are  being  lifted  up  to  the  adoring  worship  of  the  true 
God,  the  sect-spirit  rejoices  not  at  this,  if  it  bear  not  the  name 
and  trade-mark  of  its  own  party.  It  takes  no  satisfaction  in 
the  conquests  of  the  gospel,  at  home  or  abroad,  unless  its  party 
banner  is  thereby  exalted.  A  Christian  having  the  spirit  of  his 
Master  will  bid  God-speed  to  whatever  and  whoever  is  building 
up  the  Kingdom  of  God,  even  though  in  a  way  he  does  not  think 
wisest  or  best,  and  though  the  truth  thus  preached  be  mingled 


430 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


with  error  which  does  not  wholly  neutralize  its  power  for  good. 
He  will  not  rejoice  in  the  error,  but  in  the  truth  which  can  reach 
and  purify  human  lives  and  fill  them  with  faith,  hope  and 
charity,  in  spite  of  the  error  mixed  with  it.  Not  to  be  able  to 
do  this,  is  to  live  a  poor,  dwarfed  life,  with  the  sympathies  of 
the  soul  hedged  in  by  artificial  barriers. 

But  some  one  will  say.  Is  this  wide  sympathy  with  all  human 
efforts  to  promote  the  truth  and  the  welfare  of  the  race,  consist- 
ent with  the  highest  fealty  to  the  truth  which  God  has  com- 
mitted to  us?  Certainly  it  is.  Why  not?  Is  not  all  truth  one? 
If  so,  whoever  helps  on  any  truth,  and  accomplishes  any  good, 
is  to  that  extent,  a  co-worker  with  us,  and  is  hastening  that 
bright  day  when  we  shall  no  longer  "  know  in  part,  and 
prophesy  in  part,"  but  "  shall  know  even  as  we  are  known." 
The  author  of  "Ecco  Homo  "  recognizes  in  Jesus'  rebuke  of  John 
for  forbidding  a  certain  one  from  "  casting  out  devils  in  his 
name,"  because  he  "  followed  not  with  us,"  and  in  his  statement 
that  "  He  that  is  not  against  ns  is  for  us,"  indubitable  marks  of 
a  great  and  extraordinary  Teacher,  who  was  infinitely  superior 
to  all  other  teachers  of  his  time. 

2.  Another  feature  of  party  spirit  by  which  it  may  be  iden- 
tified, is  the  tendency  to  abandon  the  quest  for  truth  and  to  rest 
satisfied  with  what  has  been  gained ;  an  unwillingness  to  accept 
new  truth  because  the  fathers  did  not  see  it,  and  the  desire  to 
make  the  opinions,  teachings  and  customs  of  the  fathers  a  bar 
to  further  progress,  a  sort  of  unwritten  creed  whose  authority 
must  not  be  questioned.  Here  again  is  the  old  mistake  of 
attempting  to  confine  new  wine  in  old  bottles.  One  difference 
between  the  juice  of  the  grape  and  the  wine  of  Christianity,  is 
that  the  one  ferments  and  becomes  old,  but  the  other  is  always 
new,  and  that  the  bottle  which  is  to  contain  it  must  be  one  capa- 
ble of  continuous  and  indefinite  expansion.  Such  a  bottle  is  the 
divinely-inspired  creed  of  Christianity.  The  mistake  of  all  pre- 
vious reforms  had  been  premature  fossilization.  What  the  world 
needed  was  a  principle  of  reform  which  would  lead  those  who 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


431 


accepted  if,  to  a  continual  and  never-ending  progress  in  the 
knowledge  of  the  truth,  and  in  the  adjustment  of  life,  teaching 
and  practice  to  this  ever-expanding  rule.  If  there  be  any  justi- 
fication for  our  separate  existence,  as  we  have  asserted  there  is, 
it  is  the  acceptance  by  us  of  a  rule  of  faith  which  not  only 
makes  possible  the  essential  unity  of  Christendom,  but  which 
renders  practicable  that  continual  growth  in  the  truth  which 
the  Scriptures  require,  without  again  destroying  the  unity  of 
the  church  or  breaking  allegiance  with  its  fundamental  truth. 
There  is,  therefore,  probably  no  form  of  error  that  more  effectu- 
ally perverts  the  aim  and  genius  of  our  religious  movement,  to 
the  extent  of  its  prevalence,  than  a  slavish  obedience  to  the 
opinions,  traditions  and  customs  of  the  fathers,  or  a  stubborn 
unwillingness  to  surrender  an  old  prejudice  for  a  new  truth. 

3.  Another  sign  of  this  unseemly  spirit  of  party  is  the 
inability  to  recognize  the  image  of  Christ  in  those  who  company 
not  with  us.  It  is  right,  of  course,  and  praiseworthy,  to  wish  to 
convey  to  such  the  truth  which  we  hold  and  which  we  believe 
they  do  not  understand.  But  this  may  be  done  with  a  glad 
recognition  of  all  the  Christly  graces  they  possess.  Indeed, 
what  other  door  of  opportunity  is  there  open  for  us  by  which  we 
may  reach  such  noble  spirits  with  any  message  we  may  have 
forsthem,  than  this  perception  and  acknowledgment  of  what  is 
true  and  lovely  in  their  lives  and  characters  ?  There  are  per- 
sons, however,  so  constructed  that  it  is  difficult  for  them  to 
believe  in  the  honesty  and  sincerity  of  those  who  ditfer  from 
them;  nevertheless,  God's  grace  should  enable  us  to  conquer 
this  defect  as  well  as  others,  for  a  very  grave  defect  it  is.  It  is 
the  dead  fly  in  the  ointment  of  social  and  religious  life  Avhose 
malodorous  presence  embitters,  often,  the  tenderest  and  most 
sacred  relations. 

If  these  characteristics  have  in  any  degree  manifested  them- 
selves among  us  in  the  past,  let  no  one  charge  them  to  the  spirit 
of  a  movement  of  which  they  are  a  base  caricature,  but  rather 


432 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


to  that  human  weakness  whose  touch  has  ever  defiled  and  cor- 
rupted the  purity  of  heavenly-descended  truth. 

AN  ABUSED  MOTTO;  OR  LOYALTY  AND  LIBERTY. 

"We  have  already  referred  to  the  motto  coined  by  Thomas 
Campbell,  which  Avas  made  the  rallying  cry  in  the  early  days 
of  the  Reformation :  "  Where  the  Scriptures  speak  we  speak ; 
and  where  the  Scriptures  are  silent,  we  are  silent."  To  those 
who  have  studied  this  saying  in  the  light  of  history,  and  who 
are  acquainted  with  the  condition  of  things  in  the  religious 
world  at  the  time  of  its  origin,  there  can  be  no  doubt  as  to  its 
meaning  in  the  mouths  of  the  Campbells  and  their  co-adjutors. 
It  was  a  declaration  of  independence  from  human  authority  in 
religion.  There  had  grown  up  a  body  of  traditions  among 
Protestants,  just  as  there  had  among  the  Jews  in  the  time  of 
Christ,  and  among  Roman  Catholics  in  the  time  of  Luther, 
which  had  become  equally  binding  with  the  Scriptures,  and  in 
some  instances,  as  among  the  Jews,  had  '  made  void  the  com- 
mandments of  God."  Many  additions  had  been  made  to  the 
things  necessary  to  be  believed  and  to  be  done  in  order  to 
orthodoxy  and  to  Christian  fellowship.  In  so  far  as  these  did 
not  make  void  any  divine  requirement,  and  were  not  inconsist- 
ent wath  Christian  character,  persons  were  permitted  to  hold 
these  opinions  and  practices,  hut  in  no  case  were  they  to  he 
imposed  on  others  as  terms  of  fellowship.  "  Where  the  Scrip- 
tures speak  "  there  must,  indeed,  be  compliance  with  the  divine 
command.  Loyalty  to  God  requires  that.  But  "where  the 
Scriptures  are  silent,"  allowing  freedom  to  choose  within  the 
limits  of  divine  requirements,  there  no  human  authority  may 
bind  the  conscience.  Christian  liberty  requires  that.  The  first 
part  of  the  motto  affirms  unswerving  loyalty  to  Christ's  will, 
and  is  the  centripetal  force  of  the  Reformation;  the  latter 
asserts  human  freedom,  throws  off  the  yoke  of  religious 
tyranny,  and  is  the  centrifugal  force  of  our  movement.  These 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


433 


two  forces,  held  in  proper  equilibrium,  describe  the  circle  of 
truth  which  is  the  symbol  of  completeness. 

As  illustrations  of  the  practical  working  of  this  principle, 
Thomas  Campbell,  who  never  ceased  to  be  a  Calvinist  in 
opinion,  and  Aylett  Rains,  who,  coming  from  the  Universalis ts, 
was  not  required  to  abjure  the  opinion  that,  in  some  way,  God 
would  ultimately  bring  all  men  to  repentance  and  to  salvation, 
were  both  received  in  full  fellowship,  they  agreeing  to  hold 
these  opinions  as  mere  opinions,  and  not  to  preach  them  as  the 
gospel,  nor  to  require  others  to  accept  them  as  terms  of  fellow- 
ship. This  course  their  motto  and  the  very  genius  of  the  move- 
ment required,  for  the  faith  which  the  Scriptures  demand  is 
neither  Calvinism  nor  Arminianism,  on  the  one  hand,  nor 
Universalism,  or  its  opposite,  on  the  other,  but  faith  in  Jesus 
Christ,  as  the  only  begotten  Son  of  God  and  the  world's  only 
Savior.  If  the  opinions  above  mentioned — the  deductions  of 
finite  minds — may  be  held  without  contravening  this  essential 
faith,  or  the  obedience  which  it  involves,  then  it  would  be 
speaking  where  the  Scriptures  are  silent,  or  binding  men  where 
God  has  left  them  free,  to  exclude  such  from  Christian  fellow- 
ship. 

This  is  not  saying  that  the  Scriptures  do  not  contain  teach- 
ings on  the  questions  referred  to,  which  are  sufficient  to  guide 
an  intelligent,  unbiased  Bible  student  to  pretty  safe  and  certain 
conclusions  ;  but  it  is  only  saying  that  such  conclusions  do  not 
belong  to  the  category  of  faitli,  but  of  opinion,  or,  if  you 
please,  of  under standiJig.  There  are  many  children  of  God 
who  are  neither  intelligent  Bible  students  nor  unbiased  in  their 
minds.  These  are  to  be  received,  also,  for  Christ  has  received 
them,  without  disputation  concerning  doubtful  matters. 

But  then  there  is  the  practice  of  infant  baptism,  concerning 
which  the  "Scriptures  are  silent" — what  about  that?  It  must 
not  be  required  of  any,  as  of  binding  obligation,  since  there  is 
no  scriptural  authority  for  it.  That  much  is  clear,  if  the  motto 
be  a  correct  one.    But  is  that  all  ?   May  not  its  practice  be  per- 


434 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


mitted  among  those  members  who  believe  it  to  be  a  reasonable 
deduction  from  scriptural  premises  and  incidents  ?  No,  for  the 
practice  nullifies  the  baptism  of  believers  and  thus  "makes 
void  the  commandment  of  God."  In  so  far  as  the  practice  of 
pedo-baptism  prevails,  to  that  extent  the  great  commission  of 
our  Lord  commanding  his  chosen  ministers  to  "  make  disciples 
of  all  nations,  baptizing  them,"  etc.,  is  rendered  nugatory,  and 
if  it  were  universal  there  would  never  be  another  penitent 
believer  baptized.  It  is  because  the  practice  contravenes  posi- 
tive divine  instruction  and  prevents  those  who  accept  it  from 
speaking  where  the  Bible  speaks,  that  it  has  been  repudiated 
by  the  advocates  of  this  Reformation.  "While  the  Bible  is 
"  silent "  concerning  infant  baptism,  it  is  not  silent  concerning 
the  subject  of  baptism,  but  speaks  freely  and  fully,  by  precept 
and  example,  as  to  who  should  be  baptized,  why  they  should  be 
baptized,  and  what  is  baptism.  These  illustrations  we  give  to 
show  the  practical  working  of  the  principle  embodied  in  the 
motto  under  consideration.  It  is  the  severe  application  of  this 
principle  to  the  whole  field  of  religious  faith  and  practice  that 
has  moulded  the  position  we  occupy  as  reformers  to-day. 

If  it  should  be  found  that  we  have  erred  in  the  application 
of  this  principle,  no  one  need  be  surprised  at  that.  "  To  err  is 
human,"  and  we,  like  the  rest  of  our  species,  are  very  human. 
If  the  motto  used  by  our  fathers,  as  a  slogan  of  liberty  from 
religious  tyranny,  has  become  with  some  in  our  day  a  wail  of 
lamentation  over  the  progress  of  truth ;  if  a  principle  potent  and 
all-puissant  in  the  hands  of  our  honored  pioneers,  in  breaking 
the  shackles  of  bondage  to  human  creeds  and  traditions,  has 
become,  in  other  hands,  an  instrument  for  binding  on  the  minds 
and  consciences  of  men  the  traditions  and  limitations  of  a  past 
age,  history  is  only  repeating  itself.  As  a  matter  of  fact  we  are 
prepared  to  affirm  that  the  abuse  of  the  excellent  motto  of  Thom- 
as Camj^bell,  and  its  utter  perversion  to  ends  and  aims  wholly 
foreign  to  its  originator,  has  been  one  of  the  chief  obstacles  in 
the  way  of  an  orderly  and  healthful  progress,  and  the  most 


LESSOXS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


435 


fruitful  source  of  bitter  and  unprofitable  controversy.  This  will 
be  more  apparent  as  we  trace  the  influence  of  this  error  in  our 
historical  development, 

A  BIGHT  PRINCIPLE  WRONGLY  APPLIED. 

That  the  principle  embodied  in  the  saying  of  Thomas  Camp- 
bell, when  rightly  understood,  is  a  true  one,  no  Protestant  can 
well  question.  It  was  only  a  striking  way  of  affirming  the 
Scriptures  to  be  the  only  authority  in  religion,  and  that  its  re- 
quirements must  not  be  omitted,  on  the  one  hand,  or  added  to 
by  human  authority  on  the  other.  But  how  often  it  is  that  a 
true  principle,  wrongly  applied,  works  the  most  disastrous  re- 
sults !  The  inquisition,  St.  Bartholomew's  Massacre,  and  all 
the  martyr-fires  of  the  Christian  centuries  are  instances  of  this 
truth. 

It  was  not  long  after  the  publication  of  the  famous  motto, 
and  the  inauguration  of  the  actual  work  of  Reformation  when 
there  were  evidences  of  a  grave  misapprehension,  on  the  part  of 
some,  of  its  meaning  and  application.  It  is  related  of  a  certain 
congregation  that  vfhen  one  of  its  members,  in  the  cooling  au- 
tumn, suggested  the  propriety  of  procuring  a  stove  to  warm  the 
room  wherein  they  met  for  worship,  one  zealous  brother  vehe- 
mently opposed  the  motion  on  the  ground  that  there  was  no 
"  Thus  Saith  the  Lord "  for  the  use  of  a  stove  ;  that  Peter 
"  warmed  himself  by  the  fire,"  and  that  we  ought  not  to  intro- 
duce such  an  innovation  upon  apostolic  practice !  One  of  the 
earliest  editorials  of  the  writer  was  in  reply  to  an  attack,  by 
our  then  leading  paper,  on  the  practice  of  using  baptisteries  in 
churches.  We  were  told  that  the  custom  was  entirely  without 
apostolic  sanction ;  that  Christ  was  baptized  in  a  flowing  stream, 
and  that  such  a  thing  as  a  "  box  "  in  which  to  baptize  people 
was  a  clear  departure  from  Scriptural  example ;  that  as  the 
Scriptures  are  "  silent "  concerning  baptisteries,  therefore  we 
ought  to  "  speak  "  out  against  them  ! 

In  the  earlier  years  of  the  writer's  ministry  an  aged  preacher 


436 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


spent  a  night  with  us  where  we  were  engaged  in  a  protracted 
meeting.  Before  retiring,  the  aged  brother  was  asked  to  con- 
duct family  worship.  He  declined,  saying  he  had  been  unable 
to  satisfy  his  mind  that  there  was  any  scriptural  authority  for 
the  practice  !  These  are,  of  course,  rare  and  exceptional  cases. 
But  it  is  remembered  well  by  many  of  our  readers  that  Sunday- 
schools  were  violently  opposed  by  certain  brethren,  for  the  dou- 
ble reason  that  the  "  sects  "  had  them,  and  the  Scriptures  were 
"  silent  "  on  the  subject.  We  are  by  no  means  sure  that  this 
opposition  has  entirely  ceased  yet.  It  did  not  satisfy  these 
objectors  that  the  duty  of  teaching  the  Avord  of  God  was  plainly 
taught  in  the  Scriptures  ;  what  they  demanded  was  a  specific 
command  or  example  for  this  particular  method  of  teaching  it. 

^ye  all  know  of  the  sharp  and  often  bitter  controversy  that 
raged  among  us  for  a  quarter  of  a  century  on  the  right  of  the 
churches  to  use  instrumental  music  in  the  worship,  or  to  co-ope- 
rate, through  missionary  societies,  in  the  work  of  evangelizing 
the  world.  The  echo  of  this  controversy,  specially  as  it  relates 
to  mission  work,  has  scarcely  died  away  yet.  There  are  still 
among  us  many  as  true  and  tried  brethren  as  ever  enlisted  in 
au}^  cause,  who,  by  the  false  application  of  a  right  principle,  are 
kept  aloof  from  all  our  organized  elforts  to  carry  out  Christ's 
commission. 

"  We  have  no  account  in  the  Scriptures,"  say  they,  "  of  any 
missionary  society,  with  its  President,  Secretary  and  Board,  and 
therefore  they  are  unnecessary  and  unauthorized  innovations, 
being  in  violation  of  the  motto  of  Thomas  Campbell,  '  Where 
the  Scriptures  speak  we  speak,  and  where  the  Scriptures  are  si- 
lent we  are  silent.'  "  In  vain  has  it  been  urged  upon  them  that 
the  duty  of  preaching  the  gospel  to  "  all  nations  "  and  to  "  every 
creature  "  is  clearly  taught,  and  that  since  there  are  many 
methods  of  doing  this  work  we  are  at  liberty  to  choose  any  one 
which  experience  has  taught  to  be  most  successful,  provided  it 
violates  no  principle  of  the  gospel.  The  "  silence  "  of  the  Scrip- 
tures about  these  societies  is  sufficient  reason  for  their  standing 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


437 


aloof  from  their  brethren  in  tlie  great  co-operative  evangelistic 
movements  of  the  age — the  chief  glory  of  the  modern  church ! 

It  would  be  difficult  to  overestimate  the  harm  that  has  re- 
sulted from  this  abuse  of  a  noble  motto.  Instead  of  being  able 
to  mass  all  our  forces  in  united  action  to  carry  the  pure  gospel 
to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  we  have  been  hampered  and  divided  by 
this  pernicious  error,  and  a  large  part  of  our  strength  frittered 
away  in  profitless  controversy  and  desultory  efforts. 

Instead  of  presenting  to  the  world  an  illustration  of  that 
unity  for  which  we  plead — a  union,  in  Christ,  of  willing  hearts 
and  hands,  working  togetlier  for  the  salvation  of  the  world — 
we  have  presented  the  spectacle  of  isolated  and  independent 
churches  engaged  in  a  heated  controversy  over  their  I'ight  to 
CO  operate  in  an  organized  and  systematic  way,  to  evangelize  the 
nations ! 

Instead  of  "standing  fast  in  the  liberty  wherewith  Christ 
hath  made  us  free,"  a  liberty  re-asserted  by  our  fathers,  in  the 
motto  under  consideration,  and  maintained  by  them  at  fearful 
cost  of  privations,  toils  and  fierce  conflicts,  many,  alas,  have 
shown  a  tendency  to  become  entangled  once  more  in  the  yoke 
of  human  bondage,  and  bind  themselves,  hand  and  foot,  with 
the  very  chains  which  their  religious  progenitors  refused  to 
wear,  the  chains  of  tradition  and  custom ;  for  the  misapplica- 
tion of  the  Camjjbell  motto  is  as  veritable  a  human  tradition  as 
ever  bound  scribe  or  Pharisee  in  spiritual  bondage. 

Instead  of  drawing  the  line,  clear  and  sharp,  between  the 
things  essential  and  the  things  indifferent,  between  matters  of 
faith  and  matters  of  opinion  and  method,  as  did  the  original 
leaders,  for  the  most  part,  in  this  movement,  and  as  do  our  real 
leaders  to-day,  the  victims  of  a  perverted  motto  fail  to  make 
any  such  distinction  and  apply  to  the  methods  of  church  work 
and  worship,  a  principle  applicable  only  in  the  realm  of  faith, 
of  fundamental  truth  and  organic  law. 

Instead  of  exhibiting  in  our  church  life  the  distinction  be- 
tween the  bondage  of  law  and  the  liberty  of  the  gospel,  which 


438 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


our  knowledge  of  the  divisions  of  God's  word,  and  of  the  distinc- 
tions between  dilferent  dispensations,  would  seem  to  peculiarly 
qualify  us  to  do,  the  error  alluded  to  has  caused  many  to  mani- 
fest the  spirit  of  legalism  under  the  forms  of  the  gospel. 

Instead  of  being  the  foremost  missionary  people  in  the 
world,  as  the  logic  of  our  position  compels  us  to  be,  we  are  far 
in  the  rear  of  the  leading  religious  bodies  of  the  age,  partly,  of 
course,  because  we  are  young  yet,  but  chiefly  because  of  the  re- 
sistance we  have  had  to  overcome  in  this  false  application  of  a 
venerable  motto,  which  denied  us  the  scriptural  right  to  organ- 
ize our  forces  for  the  work. 

In  view  of  all  these  facts,  one  might  reasonably  question 
whether  it  were  not  a  misfortune  that  Thomas  Campb^ell  ever 
uttered  his  famous  motto.  But  it  was  no  misfortune.  It  was  a 
great  principle  and  did  noble  service.  Its  abuse  by  those  who 
never  comprehended  its  trae  import  has  been  the  misfortune. 
But  God  can  overrule  human  mistakes  to  the  good  of  his  cause, 
and  we,  and  those  who  come  after  us,  will  prove  dull  students  of 
history  if  we  do  not  profit  by  the  experiences  of  -  the  past.  A 
half  or  three  quarters  of  a  century  is  a  brief  period  in  the  his- 
tory of  a  great  movement  in  religious  thought.  If  this  period 
shall  sufBce  to  demonstrate  the  folly  and  impracticability  of 
certain  hindering  forces  among  us,  and  to  make  us  wise  in  the 
application  of  the  great  principles  of  religious  reform  to  the  pro- 
blems of  this  and  of  succeeding  generations,  the  historian  of  the 
future  will  not  reckon  it  a  barren  and  a  fruitless  period  in  our 
religious  development.  !N^or  can  we  close  our  treatment  of  this 
error,  which  some  may  regard  as  too  severe  an  indictment  of 
the  past,  without  expressing  the  sincere  conviction  that  we  are 
emerging  from  the  shadows  and  errors  incident  to  the  prepara- 
tory stages  of  a  religious  movement,  and  have  already  entered 
upon  a  brighter  and  more  prosperous  era,  an  era  to  be  marked 
with  great  increase  in  spiritual  power  and  evangelistic  aggres- 
siveness, in  which  the  world  shall  feel  and  know  the  meaning 
and  power  of  our  mission  as  never  before. 


LESSON'S  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


439 


DOCTRINAL  EXTREMES. 

The  philosophy  of  tendencies,  or  the  causes  controlling  the 
various  currents  of  thought  which  have  departed  from  sound 
reason  and  true  principles  of  interpretation,  would  make  an  in- 
teresting and  profitable  study  in  itself.  Oscillation  from  one 
extreme  to  another  seems  to  be  a  law  of  mind  no  less  than  of 
physics.  To  any  one  familiar  with  this  law  it  is  not  a  matter 
of  surprise  that  certain  extreme  views  have  been  developed 
among  us  from  time  to  time,  both  of  a  practical  and  doctrinal 
nature.  Some  of  the  former  have  already  been  pointed  out,  and 
it  remains  now  to  indicate  a  few  of  the  latter.  It  should  be 
stated  in  the  beginning  that  most  of  the  extremes  to  be  men- 
tioned were  never  held  by  the  representative  men  among  us,  and 
that  many  of  them  are  already  in  the  past  tense,  showing  that 
the  general  body  is  healthy  and  will  in  time  correct  all  these 
evil  tendencies. 

1.  Literalism  or  Legalism.  A  few  years  ago  this  charge 
was  made  against  us  by  a  certain  theological  professor,  who  ap- 
plied it  indiscriminately  to  the  advocates  of  this  Reformation  as 
a  fixed  principle  or  permanent  characteristic.  This  was  not 
true,  and  the  charge  was  rightly  repelled  by  our  religious  press. 
Our  own  denial,  however,  contained  the  frank  admission  that 
there  were  some  among  us  whom  we  believed  to  be  vulnerable 
to  the  charge,  but  it  was  denied  that  they  fairly  repi'esented  the 
spirit  of  our  religious  movement.  It  is  easy  to  see  how  a  cer- 
tain class  of  minds,  starting  with  the  admitted  principle  that 
the  word  of  God  is  our  only  authentic  guide  in  religion,  would 
run  it  into  the  baldest  literalism.  The  "  word  of  Grod,"  under 
tlieir  manipulation,  soon  becomes  a  thing  of  mere  letters  and 
syllables,  whose  life  and  spirit  have  dej)arted.  "  We  have  a 
law,"  said  some  of  that  class  in  our  Savior's  time,  "  and  accord- 
ing to  that  law  he  ought  to  die."  And  he  diddle — the  victim  of 
a  narrow,  lifeless  legalism.  Hog  est  meum  corpus — "  This  is 
my  body,"  cried  Luther,  unable,  at  once,  to  escape  the  bondage 


440 


LESSOXS  FBOM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


of  Romish  legalism,  as  expressed  in  the  monstrous  dogma  of 
transubstantiaion.  We  have  a  law  of  pardon,"  say  modern 
legalists,  "  and  by  that  law  the  pious  unimmersed  must  be 
damned."  No  allowance,  or  certainly  no  suijicient  allowance, 
is  made  here  for  honest  mistakes,  for  confidence  misplaced  in 
human  leadership,  or  for  early  religious  training,  and  no  ade- 
quate distinction  is  made  between  those  who  knowingly  disobey 
Christ,  and  those  who  obey  him  to  the  best  of  their  knowledge, 
provided  that  knowledge  be  imperfect.  Nor  do  these  minds  al- 
ways discriminate  between  what  the  gospel  requires  of  all  who 
understand  its  provisions,  and  what  God,  in  his  infinite  wisdom 
and  compassion  may  accept  from  those  who  render  the  best 
obedience  possible  to  them.  They  insist,  rather,  on  binding 
God  with  the  law  wherewith  He  has  bound  us.  This  is  literal- 
ism pushed  to  the  extreme  of  baldest  legalism.  What  Christ 
requires  of  us  is  to  preach  his  gospel  to  the  world  and  offer  its 
salvation  on  the  conditions  he  has  named.  To  go  beyond  that, 
and  limit  his  mercy  to  those  only  who  render  a  perfect  formal 
obedience,  and  pronounce  unsaved  all  others,  is  as  great  disloy- 
alty to  him  as  to  omit  any  of  the  express  terms  of  pardon  and 
reconciliation. 

The  worst  feature  of  this  I'^galistic  spirit,  however,  is  the 
false  confidence  it  inspires  in  those  who,  having  complied  with 
the  ordinances  of  the  gospel,  and  its  outward  observances,  as 
baptism,  church  membership  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  imagine 
their  spiritual  condition  to  be  all  that  could  be  desired.  Others 
may  be  troubled  about  their  fitness  for  heaven — these  never. 
They  know  they  are  saved,  not  because  they  are  conscious  of 
having  the  mind  of  Christ ;  not  because  of  that  inward  peace 
which  comes  from  the  spirit's  harmony  with  the  divine  will,  but 
because  they  have  been  baptized  and  belong  to  the  church  ! 
This  evil  is  most  predominant,  of  course,  in  the  Roman  Catholic 
Church,  where  the  question  of  personal  piety,  or  even  etliics,  is 
entirely  obscured  by  the  overshadowing  consideration  of  com- 
pliance with  the  rites  of  the  church. 


LESSONS  FBOM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


441 


It  has  many  victims,  however,  in  Protestant  Pedo-baptist 
bodies,  and  has  made  its  baleful  influence  felt  both  among  Bap- 
tists and  Disciples.  The  best  men  in  all  these  bodies  condemn 
the  evil,  but  they  have  not  extinguished  it.  In  its  essence  it  is 
elevating  the  letter  above  the  spirit,  and  the  ordinance  above  the 
life.  When  the  ordinances  are  human  and  greatly  multiplied, 
legalism  reaches  its  absurdest  climax.  "  !N"ot  on  the  Sabbath 
day,  lest  we  be  defiled,"  said  the  red-handed  murderers  of 
Christ,  and  no  doubt  there  are  murderers  now  who  would  not 
dare  to  eat  meat  on  Friday ! 

2.  The  Crusade  Against  Mystery.  At  the  birth  of  this  re- 
formatory movement  the  amount  of  superstition  that  prevailed 
among  religious  people  is  almost  incredible.  Ghosts  and  ap- 
paritions of  various  kinds  were  not  uncommon  testimonials  of 
conversion,  and  the  Bible  itself  was  regarded  as  enshrouded  in 
an  impenetrable  mystery,  save  to  the  elect  few  whose  duty  it 
was  to  expound  it.  It  was  not  only  natural  but  eminently  pro- 
per that  the  early  reformers  should  make  war  against  this  mys- 
ticism which  obscured  the  plainest  commandments  of  God,  and 
should  present  Christianity  as  an  intelligible  system  which  any 
man  with  good  common  sense  and  a  sincere  desire  to  know  the 
truth  could  understand.  They  held  that  if  God's  word,  as  it  re- 
lates to  man's  duty  and  the  plan  of  salvation,  could  not  be  un- 
derstood by  common  people,  it  was  no  revelation  at  all.  So  far 
this  was  well ;  but  who,  with  any  knowledge  of  human  nature, 
could  not  have  foretold  that  this  habit  of  explaining  mysteries 
would  be  carried  to  an  extreme?  And  so  it  has  been  in  some 
instances.  Just  as  modern  science,  puffed  up  with  its  success 
in  dissipating  many  former  mysteries,  has  shown  a  tendency  to 
discard  what  it  cannot  explain,  and  so  to  reject  the  miraculous 
or  supernatural,  so  a  few  among  us,  carried  away  by  this  same 
tendency,  have  been  led  to  deny  some  things  which  they  have 
been  unable  to  sound  with  the  plummet  of  human  reason. 
There  are  certain  to  be  mysteries  as  long  as  we  know  only  "  in 
part."    Paul  declares  the  incarnation  to  be  a  great  mystery, 


442 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


but  there  are  religionists  who  endeavor  to  relieve  this  sublime 
fact  of  all  mystery  by  reducing  it,  until  it  comes  within  the  com- 
pass of  human  reason,  and  so  make  it  a  purely  human  instead 
of  a  superhuman  fact. 

While  the  extreme  just  mentioned  has  rarely  found  utter- 
ance among  us,  and  never  had  any  considerable  endorsement, 
there  has  been  a  more  decided  tendency  to  limit  the  operation 
of  the  Holy  Spirit  to  such  methods  as  are  known  to  human  rea- 
son. And  here  again  the  law  of  extremes  begetting  extremes 
holds  good.  At  the  beginning  of  this  Reformation  the  word  of 
God  was  considered  a  "  dead  lette-,"  and  the  gospel  was  not  re- 
lied on  to  convict  men  of  sin,  but  the  Holy  Spirit  must,  by 
"  naked  impact,"  on  the  human  spirit,  produce  conviction  and 
conversion.  Evidently,  one  of  the  first  duties  which  reformers 
owed  to  the  religious  world,  was  to  exalt  the  word  of  God,  the 
gospel  of  our  Lord  Jesns  Christ,  to  its  rightful  place  as  the  cho- 
sen vehicle  of  God  for  illuminating  the  world's  darkness,  and  as 
the  Spirit's  sword  to  pierce  the  sinner's  heart.  This  was  done 
grandly,  and  men  were  made  to  see  that  to  ignore  God's  word, 
while  calling  on  him  for  light,  was  to  do  despite  to  the  Spirit  of 
grace  as  well  as  to  the  God  of  truth.  But,  "  as  it  was  in  the  be- 
ginning, is  now  and  ever  will  be,"  while  men  are  in  the  flesh, 
some  minds  carried  this  truth  to  an  extreme,  and  taught  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  has,  or  uses,  no  other  means  for  influencing  the 
sinner's  mind  than  the  written  word.  That  is  an  extreme,  and, 
as  we  believe,  an  anti-scriptui'al  position.  The  Holy  Spirit  in- 
fluences men  through  the  church,  by  the  individual  lives  of 
Christians,  which  show  the  fruit  of  the  Spirit,  by  the  preacher's 
tone  and  countenance,  and  tears,  and,  no  doubt,  by  many  special 
providences.  When  we  limit  the  Holy  Spirit  to  the  written 
word,  we  go  beyond  the  requirements  of  that  word,  and  enter 
into  a  field  of  fruitless  controversy. 

3.  A  Head  Religion.  The  mental  confusion  which  prevail- 
ed among  religionists  half  a  century  ago  on  the  rationale  of 
conversion,  and  the  utter  bewilderment  of  many  honest  inquirers 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


44;] 


after  the  way  of  life,  made  it  necessary  for  tlie  early  advocates 
of  "the  ancient  order  of  things''  to  give  great  prominence  to  the 
Scriptural  terms  of  pardon.  It  was  no  uncommon  thing  in  those 
early  days  for  the  speaker  to  be  interrupted  with  some  exclam- 
ation of  joy  or  approval  from  one  who  had  been  long  "  seeking 
religion,"  as  the  clear  light  of  God's  word  was  made  to  shine  on 
his  darkened  faith.  To  answer  clearly  and  in  Scrij^tural  terms 
the  question,  "  What  must  I  do  to  be  saved  ?  "  early  became  a 
prime  requisite  for  any  one  wishing  to  become  an  accepted 
preacher  among  us.  The  ability  to  define  faith,  show  how  it 
comes,  how  it  saves,  and  its  relation  to  other  acts  of  obedience, 
explain  repentance,  what  it  is,  what  it  is  not,  and  what  pro- 
duces it ;  the  place  of  baptism,  its  meaning  and  design,  has 
ever  been  a  marked  characteristic  of  the  preaching  of  this  Re- 
formation. 

It  is  not  unnatural,  therefore,  that  one  of  the  charges  brought 
against  us  by  our  enemies  is  that  we  have  nothing  but  a  Jiead 
religion.  While  we  have  insisted,  rightly,  that  no  religion  will 
stand  the  scrutiny  of  this  enlightened  age  that  cannot  vindicate 
itself  at  the  bar  of  right  reason,  and  give  an  intelligent  account 
of  its  principles  and  processes,  it  may  now  be  admitted,  we 
think,  with  all  candor  and  frankness,  that  many  preachers  have 
given,  if  not  an  undue,  yet  a  disproportionate  emphasis  to 
the  intellectual  side  of  Christianity,  or  the  theory  of  salvation. 
With  the  fondness  for  clearing  up  mystery,  mentioned  in  a  pre- 
vious place,  and  the  ability  to  prove  from  the  word  of  God,  that 
the  order  of  faith,  repentance,  confession,  baptism,  pardon  and 
church  membership  which  they  presented,  was  the  "  ancient  or- 
der," there  was  a  great  temptation  to  dwell  on  these  things,  in 
an  argumentative  way,  and  purely  from  an  intellectual  stand- 
point, to  the  neglect  of  that  heart-searching  presentation  of 
Christ,  as  Savior,  which  alone  convicts  of  sin  and  prepares  the 
soul  for  acceptable  obedience. 

Many  of  us  whose  heads  are  now  streaked  with  gray,  realize 
that  we  made  a  mistake  in  our  earlier  ministry  in  spending  so 


444 


LESSONS  FBOM  OUB  PAST  EXPEBIENCE. 


much  time  in  telling  people  what  to  do  to  be  saved  who  did  not 
realize  that  they  were  lost.  We  have  come  to  see  that  the  great 
work  of  an  evangelist — by  far  the  most  difficult,  as  well  as  the 
most  important  work  he  has  to  do — is  to  convict  men  of  sin,  to 
make  them  feel  their  need  of  salvation,  and  then  to  so  present 
Christ,  in  all  the  fulness  of  his  divine  character  and  mission, 
that  they  may  see  in  him  the  Savior  they  need.  This  great 
work  accomplished,  it  is  comparatively  an  easy  task  to  point 
out  how  a  willing  soul  can  find  peace  in  resting  on  the  promises 
of  God  la  Christ.  It  is  to  be  feared  that  by  pursuing  a  contrary 
course,  and  dwelling  too  exclusively  on  the  conditions  of  pardon 
that  many  have  mistaken  their  conviction  of  the  truthfulness  of 
the  theory  presented,  for  conviction  of  sin,  and  so  have  come  to 
baptism  without  an  adequate  sense  of  their  spiritual  needs,  or 
a  proper  appreciation  of  Christ  as  a  perfect  Savior.  It  is  grati- 
fying to  add  that  this  lesson  has  been  learned  by  the  great 
bod}^  of  our  ministry,  and  that  probably  there  can  be  found  no- 
where in  Christendom  more  incisive,  heart-searching  preaching 
of  the  great  doctrine  of  the  cross — human  depravity,  the  ruinous 
effects  of  sin,  the  necessity  of  regeneration,  and  the  all-suffici- 
ency of  Christ — than  in  the  pulpits  of  this  Reformation.  And 
Avhen  there  is  joined  with  this  sort  of  preaching  the  ability  to 
state,  clearly  and  forcibly,  the  scriptural  terms  on  which  an 
alien  sinner  may  receive  pardon,  we  have  the  elements  for  suc- 
cessful evangelization.  Hence  the  remarkable  success  attending 
the  labors  of  our  evangelists. 

It  is  now  seen  that  in  the  tendency  to  emphasize,  dispropor- 
tionately, the  true  theory  or  rationale  of  conversion,  we  are  de- 
parting from  a  fundamental  principle  of  our  own  movement, 
namely,  that  Christ  himself,  in  his  glorious  personality  and 
Messianic  offices,  is  the  object  of  saving  faith,  and  not  doctrines 
and  theories,  however  true  they  may  be.  No  more  valuable 
distinction  than  that  between  faith  and  oi^inion — the  former 
resting  on  the  sure  testimony  of  God  concerning  his  Son,  Jesus 
Christ,  and  the  latter  on  the  deductions  of  human  reason — was 


LESSONS  FEOM  OUR  FAST  EXPERIENCE.  445 

probably  ever  made  in  any  religious  reformation.  That  preach- 
ing, therqfore,  which  makes  its  theories  and  arguments  about 
the  jp^CLi^  of  salvation  so  prominent  as  to  obscure  the  Savior,  is 
alike  untrue  to  the  New  Testament  models,  and  to  our  own  de- 
claration of  principles.  The  true  rule  is  to  deal  with  religious 
errors  just  as  they  are  seen  to  be  obstacles  in  the  way  of 
persons  coming  to  Christ,  and  never  in  such  a  manner  as  to  sub- 
stitute any  view  of  Christ's  ordinances  or  doctrine,  for  Christ 
liimself  SiS  the  sole  object  of  a  living  and  saving  faith. 

It  is  well  to  have  persons  come  into  the  church  with  clear 
and  intelligent  views  of  the  gospel  and  of  the  great  scheme  of 
redemption.  It  is  absolutely  essential  that  they  come  iu  with 
a  sense  of  the  demerit  of  sin,  with  the  spirit  of  true  penitence, 
with  a  personal  love  for  Jesus  Christ,  and  a  determination  to 
follow  him  whithersoever  he  may  lead,  if  they  are  to  be  living 
members  of  the  body  of  Christ.  Let  the  head  receive  due  atten- 
tion, but  neglect  not  the  heart,  "  out  of  which  are  the  issues  of 
life."  Let  not  theology  usurp  the  place  of  faith  in  Christ,  for 
we  are  justified  by  our  faith,  not  by  our  opinions,  not  even  by 
our  orthodoxy. 

The  sum  of  what  we  have  here  written  is  that  in  our  presen- 
tation of  the  gospel,  due  regard  must  be  had  for  the  proportion 
of  truth  ;  that  its  intellectual  side  must  not  be  emphasized  at 
the  expense  of  the  moral  and  spiritual,  and  that  ordinances  and 
doctrines  must  not  be  made  so  prominent  as  to  obscure  the  per- 
sonal Christ,  to  enthrone  whom  in  the  heart  should  be  the  su- 
preme aim  of  all  preaching ;  that  the  ethical  and  spiritual  ele- 
ments of  Christianity  must  hold  the  pre-eminence  in  our  teach- 
ing that  they  held  in  the  sublime  doctrine  of  Christ,  if  this 
movement  is  to  command  the  respect  of  the  world  and  accom- 
plish its  mission  in  the  church.  The  general  recognition  of 
these  truths  among  our  ministry,  and  the  present  tendency  to 
correct  whatever  has  been  partial  aud  disproportionate  in  their 
presentation  of  Christ's  gospel  to  men,  may  be  reckoned  among 
the  most  valuable  lessons  gleaned  from  the  experience  of  the  past. 


446 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


EXTREME  CHURCH  INDEPENDENCY. 

The  repudiation  of  all  human  creeds  formulated  by  ecclesi- 
astical councils  as  of  any  binding  authority  on  the  conscience, 
naturally  enough  gendered  a  strong  anti-ecclesiastical  sentiment 
among  the  early  churches  of  this  reformation.  Those  especially 
who  had  felt  the  oppression  of  the  various  ecclesiasticisms,  great- 
ly feared  lest  any  movement  for  systematic,  organized  co-opera- 
tive work  would  develop  into  ecclesiastical  tyranny.  This  feel- 
ing, right  enough  within  proper  limits,  led  to  an  extreme  view  of 
church  independency  which  experience  has  taught  us  to  be  ut- 
terly impracticable.  One  of  the  lessons  which  we  have  learned 
from  the  experience  of  the  past  is  that  the  theory  of  church  in- 
dependency which  prevents  co-operation  between  churches  and 
individuals,in  an  orderly  and  systematic  way,  for  the  spread  of 
the  gospel,  and  for  doing  anything  that  can  be  accomplished  only 
by  united  effort,  is  a  foe  to  religious  progress,  an  apology  for 
doing  nothing,  and  a  hindrance  to  the  evangelization  of  the 
world.  Such  a  theory,  therefore,  is  as  unscriptural  as  it  is  con- 
trary to  all  the  conclusions  and  results  of  our  best  civilization. 

We  have  learned  that  co-operation  in  Christian  work,  so 
far  from  being  identical  with,  or  a  tendency  towards,  ecclesias- 
tical despotism,  is  the  best  remedy  for,  and  the  only  safeguard 
against,  such  despotism ;  that  as  soon  as  the  churches  are  turn- 
ed away  from  their  legitimate  work  in  joining  hands  to  evange- 
lize the  world,  they  are  apt  to  indulge  in  vain  speculations,  to 
elevate  human  traditions  to  the  j)lace  of  divine  authority,  and 
inaugurate  a  tyranny  of  opinionism.  Evidence  of  this  fact  is 
not  wanting  in  our  own  history.  Whatever  tendency  there  may 
be  among  us  to  make  mere  opinions  tests  of  fellowship  will  not 
be  found,  we  think,  to  co-exist  with  a  broad  missionary  spirit 
which  finds  expression  in  co-operative  efforts  to  evangelize  the 
world.  And  the  reason  for  this  is  plain.  The  evangelistic 
spirit  is  also  the  evangelical  or  gospel  spirit. 

The  danger  among  us  has  always  been  in  the  direction  of  an 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


447 


extreme  individualism  rather  than  a  tyrannical  ecclesiasticism. 
The  very  circumstances  under  which  this  movement  came  into 
being,  the  independent  spirit  fostered  by  its  own  principles  and 
the  necessary  reaction  from  the  religious  bondage  against  which 
it  was  a  protest,  all  conspired  to  this  end.  It  would  be  difficult 
to  point  out  any  victims  of  ecclesiastical  tyranny  among  us,  or 
any  disasters  that  have  resulted  from  such  a  tendency.  On  the 
other  hand,  our  whole  past  history  has  been  marked  by  evils 
resulting  from  the  opposite  extreme.  In  the  establishment  of 
colleges  and  religious  papers,  in  the  selection  and  ordination 
of  ministers,  and  many  other  things  which  affect  the  interests  of 
the  whole  body,  individual  preferences  and  conceits  have  too 
often  ruled,  instead  of  the  wise  counsel  of  all  the  brethren  who 
had  a  right  to  be  consulted  in  these  matters.  How  often  our 
cause  has  suffered  in  reputation  by  these  ill-advised  enterprises 
those  acquainted  with  our  history  well  know.  These  mistakes 
resulting  from  individual  and  church  independency  acting  with- 
in the  sphere  of  general  interests,  have  been  among  the  most 
serious  hindrances  to  the  progress  of  the  Reformation.  Indeed, 
nothing  but  the  inherent  power  of  the  truths  we  have  held  and 
proclaimed  could  have  overcome  these  blunders  in  our  ad- 
ministrative policy,  and  enabled  us  to  attain  the  success  we 
have  realized. 

The  time  has  fully  come,  however,  when  we  should  relieve 
our  divine  plea  for  the  unity  of  Christians  on  the  basis  of  a  re- 
stored gospel,  of  all  impediments  to  its  progress  and  triumph, 
resulting  from  the  mistakes  of  the  past.  Already,  many  of 
these  mistakes  have  been  recognized,  and  will  not  be  repeated. 
But  the  morbid  fear  of  ecclesiasticism  still  hinders  the  correc- 
tion of  some  of  the  errors  mentioned  above.  The  line  between 
legitimate  oversight  or  supervision  of  those  interests  which  are 
common,  including  the  necessary  co-operation  and  organization 
to  this  end,  and  the  exercise  of  legislative  or  judicial  functions 
involving  matters  of  faith  or  the  rights  of  conscience,  needs  to 
be  more  clearly  drawn  in  many  minds,  in  order  to  the  harmon- 


448 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


ious  advance  of  all  our  forces  along  the  various  lines  of  Christ- 
ian work.  ]S"ever  has  there  been  less  disposition  to  interfere  with 
true  Christian  liberty  or  the  scriptural  freedom  of  the  churches, 
than  now,  among  those  who  are  foremost  in  co-operative  work, 
and  in  the  advocacy  of  more  system  and  order  in  our  adminis- 
trative methods.  The  admonition  to  be  "  subject  to  one  an- 
other "  has  a  wider  application  than  it  has  heretofore  received 
among  us.  In  whatever  affects  the  weal  of  the  cause  throughout 
imj  given  region,  whether  that  region  be  a  single  count}^  or 
State,  or  embraces  the  whole  brotherhood,  we  must  learn  to  be 
subject  to  the  judgment  and  wishes  of  the  brethren,  and  a  part 
must  accept  the  mathematical  axiom  and  be  content  to  be  less 
than  the  whole. 

As  our  numbers  increase,  and  our  work  extends  over  ever- 
widening  areas,  it  will  become  more  and  more  apparent  to 
thoughtful  minds,  that  some  things  must  be  managed  different- 
ly from  what  they  have  been  in  the  past,  if  we  are  to  fulfill  the 
possibilities  of  our  mission.  Tlie  habits  of  childhood  and  of 
youth  will  not  suffice  for  manhood.  Our  whole  method  of  sup- 
plying the  ever-increasing  demand  for  faithful  and  competent 
preachers  of  the  word  needs  revision,  both  for  correction  and 
enlargement.  The  individualistic,  hap-hazard  method  of  the 
past,  not  yet  wholly  obsolete,  by  which  every  man  who  felt 
called  to  preach,  was  permitted  to  do  so,  and  to  stand  forth  as  a 
public  representative  of  our  cause,  without  regard  to  his  ability, 
his  culture,  his  knowledge  of  the  Bible,  and  in  some  cases  with- 
out even  the  requisite  moral  qualifications,  has  heaped  more  re- 
proach on  the  plea  we  make  than  a  whole  generation  of  worthy 
ministers  can  remove.  Toothing  among  us  presses  more  earnest- 
ly for  immediate  attention  than  the  adoption  of  methods  and 
means  for  supplying  an  adequate  number  of  suitably  qualified 
preachers  of  the  gospel. 

But  this  opens  a  field  too  wide  for  adequate  treatment  here. 
It  involves  the  whole  question  of  ministerial  selection,  education 
and  ordination,  and  college  endowment.    Our  only  aim  here 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


449 


and  now  is  to  point  out  the  need,  and  to  indicate  that  it  can 
only  be  met  by  intelligent  co-operation  of  our  forces,  such  as 
the  extreme  view  of  church  independency  and  of  individual  su- 
premacy has,  in  the  past,  made  impossible.  It  is  gratifying  to 
know,  however,  that  this  anti-ecclesiastical  extreme  has  well- 
nigh  spent  its  force,  and  that  we  have  entered  an  era  of  organi- 
zation and  of  systematic  work. 

THE  CONTBOVEBSIAL  SPIRIT. 

One  of  the  standing  reproaches  against  the  cause  of  religious 
reformation  that  we  plead  is,  or  has  been,  that  its  advocates 
were  too  fond  of  controversy,  and  too  much  inclined  to  pugilistic 
preaching.  Those  who  have  most  frequently  made  such  a 
charge  were  regardless  of  two  facts  :  1.  No  great  or  radical  re- 
formation was  ever  inaugurated  without  severe  conflict.  2.  The 
warfare  made  against  the  Campbells  and  their  early  co-laborers 
in  the  work  of  restoring  the  original  features  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment church,  was  exceedingly  bitter  and  relentless.  It  was, 
metaphorically  speaking,  war  to  the  knife,  and  a  struggle  for 
the  right  to  exist.  There  were  gross  errors  to  be  exposed,  dan- 
gerous apostasies  to  be  denounced,  time  honored  customs  to  be 
changed  or  abolished,  and  a  new  order  of  things,  which  was  the 
"ancient  order,"  to  be  established.  Whenever  God  has  this 
class  of  work  to  be  done,  he  raises  up  the  kind  of  men  to  do  it, 
men  of  lofty  courage  and  heroic  mould.  He  had  an  Elijah  for 
the  priests  of  Baal,  a  John  the  Baptist  for  Herod,  a  Paul  to 
make  Felix  tremble,  a  Savanarola  to  denounce  Lorenzo  de  Med- 
ici, a  Luther  to  confront  the  Pope  and  the  Diet  of  Worms,  a  John 
Knox  to  stand  unawed  before  "  bloody  Mary,"  and  he  had  a 
Campbell  to  cope  with  vaunting  infidels,  haughty  bishops  of  an 
apostate  church,  and  the  ardent  sectaries  of  a  divided  Protest- 
antism, in  his  mighty  plea  for  a  return  to  the  purity  and  sim- 
plicity of  the  gospel.  And  this  conflict,  precipitated  by  the 
great  reformer  of  the  nineteenth  century,  and  fearlessly  carried 

29 


450 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


forward  under  liis  leadership  during  his  life-time,  was  espoused 
and  defended  by  as  heroic  a  class  of  men  as  ever  committed 
their  lives,  their  fortunes  and  their  honor  to  a  holy  cause. 

It  would  be  strange,  indeed,  if  this  early  necessity  of  waging 
war  against  popular  errors,  and  of  hotly  contending  for  every  foot 
of  ground  occupied,  had  not,  in  some  instances,  formed  a  habit 
of  thought  and  speech,  which,  by  a  sort  of  heredity,  should  have 
outlived  the  conditions  which  made  it  necessary.  That  such 
has  been  the  case  no  candid  and  intelligent  person  will  deny. 
And  this  habit  of  controversial  preaching,  while  tending  to 
sharpen  the  intellect,  has,  no  doubt,  been  a  hindrance  to  the 
development  of  the  spiritual  life  of  our  membership  where  it 
has  prevailed.  The  conflict  waged  for  truth,  from  the  love  of 
truth,  when  the  truth  is  assailed,  is  not  a  hindrance,  necessarily, 
to  spiritual  growth ;  but  when  this  degenerates  into  a  morbid 
fondness  for  controversy,  for  controversy's  sake,  and  goes  about 
seeking  occasion  to  gratify  itself,  it  then  deserves  to  be  classi- 
fied as  "  works  of  the  flesh,"  where  Paul  puts  it.  That  such  de- 
generacy has  never  been  known  among  us,  we  should  be  unwill- 
ing to  assert.  Indeed,  we  are  persuaded  that  if  our  preachers 
had  possessed  the  same  zeal  for  prayer-meetings  and  missionary 
collections,  during  the  last  quarter  of  a  century,  which  many  of 
them  have  displayed  for  religious  debates,  the  cause  of  primi- 
tive Christianity  would  be  far  more  widely  and  favorably 
known  than  it  is  to-day.  Nevertheless,  as  we  have  said  con- 
cerning other  mistakes,  so  can  we  say  most  truly  of  this  one, 
that  whatever  evil  tendency  may  have  existed  in  this  direction 
is  being  rapidly  corrected,  and  there  is  no  reason  to  doubt  that 
the  true  equilibrium  between  the  indifierence  to  religious  error, 
the  extreme  on  one  side,  and  the  controversial  Jiabit,  which  is 
the  other  extreme,  will  soon  be  reached,  and  has  been  reached 
by  the  great  body  of  our  ministry. 

If  any  one  should  conclude  from  the  foregoing  that,  in  our 
judgment,  there  is  not  as  great  demand  for  moral  courage  and 
heroism  in  the  pulpit  to-day,  as  there  was  at  the  beginning  of 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


451 


this  Reformation,  he  would  be  entirely  mistaken  in  such  an  in- 
ference. Never,  perhaps,  in  all  the  centuries  of  Christian  history, 
has  there  been  greater  need  for  true  Christian  heroism,  the  high- 
est type  of  courage,  than  there  is  in  the  American  pulpit  of  to- 
day. The  old  battles  have  been  fought,  and  will  never  be  fought 
again  on  the  old  lines.  The  attitude  of  the  various  religious 
bodies  towards  us,  and  towards  the  principles  we  championed 
in  the  early  part  of  the  present  century,  is  veiy  different  from 
what  it  once  was.  Both  infidelity  and  denominationalism  have 
changed  position.  This  necessitates  a  change  in  our  methods 
of  warfare,  but  requires  no  less  courage.  Besides  that,  new 
enemies  appear  on  the  field,  new  problems  confront  us  and  new 
dangers  threaten.  It  is  in  vain  that  we  turn  our  guns  upon  bat- 
tle-fields that  have  long  been  vacated,  except  by  a  few  camp 
stragglers.  The  great  issues  in  modern  thought  are  not,  elec- 
tion, the  possibility  of  a  final  apostasy,  the  precedence  of  par- 
don and  baptism,  or  of  faith  and  repentance,  the  methods  of  the 
Holy  Spirit's  operation,  and  the  relative  claims  of  rival  sects  to 
be  the  "  true  church  of  Christ."  The  world  is  now  struggling 
with  questions  more  fundamental,  such  as  the  personality  of 
God,  and  his  immanence  in  the  universe,  the  nature,  meaning 
and  authority  of  his  revelation ;  the  reality  and  assurance  of  a 
future  life  ;  the  person  and  mission  of  Christ ;  the  foundation  of 
the  church  and  its  function  in  society  ;  the  evangelization  of  the 
world  ;  reaching  and  uplifting  the  masses  with  the  gospel ;  dis- 
tribution of  wealth;  adjusting  the  relations  between  labor  and 
capital,  and  abolishing  the  liquor  traffic — the  great  source  of 
crime,  of  poverty,  and  of  individual,  social  and  political  de- 
bauchery. These  great  reforms  require  a  sublime  emphasis  on 
the  ethical  and  spiritual  side  of  Christianity.  They  require  a 
simpler  creed,  and  a  religion  that  diffuses  its  sanctifying  influ- 
ence through  all  the  ramifications  of  human  society.  Their 
triumph  demands  the  bravest  utterances  from  the  pulpit  in  con- 
demnation of  popular  evils,  and  in  inspiring  the  churches  with 


452 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


a  sense  of  their  obligation  to  the  great  moral  and  social  reforms 
of  the  age. 

But  these  great  battles  must  be  fought  in  the  spirit  of  love 
for  humanity,  for  truth  and  for  God,  and  on  a  plane  far  above 
that  of  sectarian  zeal  and  ecclesiastical  pugilism.  The  heroism 
that  antagonizes  our  own  errors,  as  well  as  those  of  our  religious 
neighbors,  ought  specially  to  be  cultivated  and  prayed  for. 
But  this,  too,  must  be  done  in  the  spirit  of  brotherly  love  and 
of  supreme  devotion  to  Christ  and  to  his  cause.  Let  us,  indeed, 
"  fight  the  good  fight  of  faith,'^  looking  well  to  it,  meanwhile, 
that the  weapons  of  our  warfare  are  not  of  the  flesh,  but  migh- 
ty before  God  to  the  casting  down  of  strongholds." 

WBAT   THIS  REFORMATION   BAS    CONTRIBUTED   TO  RELIGIOUS 

THOUGHT. 

Every  movement  among  men  should  be  able  to  justify  its 
existence  by  what  it  contributes  to  the  practical  solution  of  the 
great  problems  of  human  life,  or  to  the  promotion  of  human 
good.  In  what  respects  has  this  reformatory  movement  contri- 
buted to  the  progress  of  religious  thought,  or  to  the  advancement 
of  the  kingdom  of  God  in  the  world  ?  In  many  things,  among 
which  we  may  mention  the  following : 

1.  In  the  strong  emphasis  it  has  laid  on  the  evils  of  a 
divided  church,  and  its  victorious  plea  for  Christian  unity. 

2.  In  pointing  out  those  fundamental  and  catholic  truths 
which  constitute  the  scriptural  basis  of  unity. 

3.  In  the  repudiation  of  the  religious  authority  of  all 
human  creeds,  or  their  use  as  bases  of  communion  and  fellow- 
ship. 

4.  In  exalting  the  word  of  God  as  the  only  authoritative  and 
all-sufficient  guide  in  religious  faith  and  practice. 

5.  In  the  restoration  of  the  New  Testament  confession  of 
faith — the  confession  of  Jesus  as  the  Christ,  the  Son  of  the  liv- 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


453 


ing  God — as  the  foundation  of  the  church  and  the  only  confes- 
sion of  faith  precedent  to  baptism  and  church  membership. 

6.  In  demonstrating  the  practicability  of  preserving  essen- 
tial soundness  in  the  faith  and  unity  in  religious  teaching  and 
practice,  without  the  aid  of  a  written  authoritative  rule  of  faith, 
other  than  the  holy  Scriptures. 

7.  In  its  efforts  to  free  the  human  mind  and  conscience 
from  the  fetters  forged  by  past  generations,  thereby  making 
possible  what  God  evidently  intends,  perpetual  progress  in  the 
knowledge  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  and  of  his  wonderful  reve- 
lation. 

8.  In  its  return  to,  and  practical  use  of,  the  apostolic  meth- 
od of  evangelization,  namely,  the  simple  presentation  of  Christ 
as  the  Savior  of  the  world,  and  the  urgent  plea  that  those  who 
sincerely  purpose  to  take  him  as  Lord  and  Savior,  should  con- 
fess him  at  once  and  enter  upon  the  Christian  life  through  the 
initiatory  and  confessional  act  of  baptism. 

9.  In  its  removal  of  a  vast  amount  of  superstition  and  tra- 
ditional usage  which  had  accumulated  about  the  subject  of  con- 
version, and  presenting  it  in  the  clear  light  of  the  gospel,  which 
has  been  found  to  be  in  harmony  with  reason  and  with  the  laws 
of  man's  mental  and  moral  constitution.  This  process  has  ac- 
centuated human  responsibility  without,  in  the  least,  discounting 
the  divine  power  which  operates,  not  in  disregard  of,  but  through 
our  human  faculties. 

10.  In  teaching  and  disseminating  a  clear,  rational  and 
scriptural  view  of  faith — its  nature,  its  object,  its  relation  to  di- 
vine testimony,  and  to  salvation;  that  it  is  spiritual  vision, 
leading  to  trust,  has  the  personal  Christ  for  its  object,  and  not 
a  dogma,  comes  by  hearing  the  word  of  God,  being  based  on  di- 
vine testimony,  and  finds  its  end  in  salvation,  because  it  leads 
the  soul  to  commit  itself  to  Christ  in  active,  loving  obedience. 
Thus  discriminating  between  faith  and  opinion,  it  lifts  the  per- 
sonal, historic  Christ  far  above  all  human  creeds  and  dogmas. 

11.  In  discarding  the  unscriptural  and  anti-scriptural  phra- 


454 


LESSONS  FROM  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


seology  with  which  the  theological  schoolmen  of  the  past  have 
obscured  the  greatest  truths  of  revelation,  and  insisting  on  a 
return  to  the  pure  speech  of  the  Bible,  "  calling  Bible  things  bj^ 
Bible  names."  Much  of  the  controversy  and  many  of  the  divi- 
sions of  the  past  have  grown  out  of  these  unbiblical  phrases  and 
definitions. 

12.  In  stimulating  the  study  of  the  Bible  and  promoting  a 
clearer  understanding  of  the  relation  of  the  different  parts  of  the 
Bible  to  each  other,  and  the  nature  of,  and  distinction  between, 
the  different  dispensations  of  the  divine  government.  Especial- 
ly has  the  emphasis  laid  on  the  inductive  method  of  studying 
the  Bible  in  order  to  ascertain  the  truth,  been  productive  of  in- 
calculable good.  It  is  receiving,  now,  recognition  and  endorse- 
ment by  the  ripest  Biblical  scholarship  of  the  age. 

13.  In  its  restoration  of  the  simple  worship  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament, with  the  weekly  observance  of  the  Lord's  Supper  as  its- 
central  and  controlling  feature. 

14.  In  uncovering  and  bringing  to  light  once  more  that  al- 
most forgotten  doctrine  of  the  New  Testament — the  common 
priesthood  of  all  Christians  and  the  absolute  equality  of  all  be- 
lievers in  rights,  privileges  and  spiritual  prerogatives.  "  One  is 
your  Master  and  all  ye  are  brethren." 

15.  In  making  prominent  the  practical  and  ethical  side  of 
Christianity,  as  against  the  emotional  and  theoretical  side ;  in 
emphasizing  ovt\iopra:ry,  or  right  doing,  as  of  greater  value  than 
orthodoxy,  or  right  thinking ;  in  discounting  a  faith  that  is 
purely  sentimental,  and  insisting  on  a  living  faith  that  attests 
its  vitality  in  good  works.  This  conception  of  Christianity 
harmonizes  well  with  the  modern  tendency,  so  full  of  promise, 
to  apply  the  principles  of  the  gospel  to  the  social  evils  of  our 
times,  as  the  only  adequate  remedy  for  a  disordered  society,  as 
they  are  of  a  disordered  individual  life. 

It  may  readily  be  seen  from  this  bare  outline  of  some  of  the 
cardinal  truths  and  principles  for  which  this  movement  of  the 
nineteenth  century  stands,  along  with  other  truths  which  it 


LESSONS  FE03I  OUR  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


455 


holds  and  teaches  in  common  with  other  religious  bodies,  that 
its  success  is  identified  with  the  triumph  of  New  Testament 
Christianity.  If  the  unity  of  God's  people,  the  supreme  author- 
ity and  sufficiency  of  the  Scriptures,  the  Christo-centric  view  of 
Christianity,  which  lifts  the  personal  Christ  above  all  human 
formulations  of  doctrine  as  the  magnet  around  which  the  scat- 
tered fragments  of  a  broken  church  are  to  be  united,  the  repudi- 
ation of  scholastic  terminology,  and  a  return  to  the  simple, 
rational  method  of  New  Testament  evangelization,  the  inductive 
method  of  Bible  study  and  an  intelligent  treatment  of  the  Bib- 
lical literature,  the  assertion  of  the  common  priesthood  of  be- 
lievers and  the  necessity  for  a  practical,  beneficent  faith  which 
applies  the  gospel  to  all  our  human  ills — if  these  principles  are 
not  to  conquer  in  the  world,  then  must  Christianity,  as  taught 
by  its  Author  and  his  chosen  apostles,  prove  a  failure.  This  is 
not  saying  that  the  success  of  the  gospel  depends  on  our  advo- 
cacy of  these  principles,  but  only  that  the  principles  themselves 
are  so  vital,  so  fundamental,  that  they  cannot  fail  if  Christian- 
ity succeeds.  We  may,  indeed,  fail  through  faithlessness  to 
these  truths  which  it  has  been  our  mission  to  emphasize,  but  if 
so,  and  in  any  event,  God  will  raise  up  others  who  will  carry  on 
this  work  of  reformation  until  there  is  a  purified  and  united 
church  in  the  world. 

It  is  ours  to  help  or  to  hinder  such  a  glorious  consummation. 
We  help  it  by  recognizing  for  what  purpose  God  has  raised  us 
up,  and  by  discerning  the  times  in  which  we  live.  We  help  it 
by  facing  the  future,  not  the  past.  We  can  be  used  of  God  as  a 
vanguard  to  march  in  the  forefront  of  his  advancing  hosts,  only 
as  we  recognize  and  follow  the  leadings  of  God's  providence, 
the  promptings  of  the  divine  Sj)irit,  and  obey  the  great  law  of 
religious  growth  and  development.  We  may  hinder  or  retard 
the  work  by  failing  to  see  that  what  has  been  accomplished  is 
only  the  beginning  of  the  Reformation  which  the  church  needs, 
and  that  the  same  independent  investigation  which  marked  the 
inauguration  of  this  movement  must  continue  to  characterize  it 


456 


LESSONS  FROM  OUB  PAST  EXPERIENCE. 


at  every  stage  of  its  development,  or  it  must  cease  to  be  a  move- 
ment and  become  only  a  monument. 

The  responsibilities  of  a  sacred  trust,  the  memories  of  a  hero- 
ic past,  and  the  inspiration  of  a  more  glorious  future,  all  com- 
bine to  urge  us  onward  to  the  fulfillment  of  our  great  mission, 
and  to  the  realization,  in  human  history,  of  the  divine  ideal  of 
the  New  Testament  Church. 


^^^^      Date  Due  ' 

^  ~  ■  I 

1 1  ii>iiiM  iiiiil 

OCT ; 

^  IJv7j 

 mrr-f 

— —  

\     -  . 

t 


